Iran takes 'final' stance on nuclear deal, says U.S. must lift sanctions before Tehran rejoins

[webfact]

Iran takes 'final' stance on nuclear deal, says U.S. must lift sanctions before Tehran rejoins

By Parisa Hafezi and Arshad Mohammed

 

Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei delivers a televised speech, in Tehran, Iran January 8, 2021. Official Khamenei Website/Handout via REUTERS ATTENTION

 

DUBAI/WASHINGTON (Reuters) - Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said on Sunday that Tehran's "final and irreversible" decision was to return to compliance with the 2015 nuclear deal only if Washington lifts sanctions on the Islamic Republic, Iranian state TV reported.

 

The comment, as well as U.S. President Joe Biden's separate statement that the United States would not lift sanctions simply to get Iran back to the negotiating table, appeared to be posturing by both sides as they weigh whether and how to revive the pact.

 

The deal between Iran and six major powers limited Iran's uranium enrichment activity to make it harder for Tehran to develop nuclear arms - an ambition Iran has long denied having - in return for the easing of U.S. and other sanctions.

 

But former U.S. President Donald Trump abandoned the deal in 2018, denouncing it as one-sided in Iran's favour, and reimposed sanctions that have crippled Iran's economy.

 

"Iran has fulfilled all its obligations under the deal, not the United States and the three European countries ... If they want Iran to return to its commitments, the United States must in practice ... lift all sanctions," state TV quoted Khamenei as saying during a meeting with Air Force commanders.

 

"Then, after verifying whether all sanctions have been lifted correctly, we will return to full compliance ... It is the irreversible and final decision and all Iranian officials have consensus over it."

 

While Iran has insisted the United States first drop its sanctions before it resumes compliance, Washington has demanded the reverse.

 

In a segment of a CBS News interview taped on Friday and broadcast on Sunday, Biden said "no" when asked whether Washington would lift sanctions to get Tehran to the negotiating table.

 

Asked if Iran had to stop enriching uranium first, Biden nodded. It was not clear exactly what he meant, since Iran was allowed to enrich uranium to 3.67% under the deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

 

A senior U.S. official later said Biden meant Iran had to stop enriching beyond the deal's limits, not that it had to stop enriching entirely before the two sides might talk.

 

"They have to stop enriching beyond the limits of the JCPOA," said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity.

 

"There is nothing changed in the U.S. position. The United States wants Iran to come back into (compliance with) its JCPOA commitments and if it does, the United States will do the same."

 

Iran in January said it has resumed 20% uranium enrichment at its underground Fordow nuclear site, well above the deal's limit but far short of the 90% that is weapons-grade.

 

In response to Trump's withdrawal, Tehran has breached the deal's key limits by building up its stockpile of low-enriched uranium, refining uranium to a higher level of purity and using advanced centrifuges for enrichment.

 

Biden has said if Tehran returned to strict compliance, Washington would follow suit and use that as a springboard to a broader agreement on other areas of concern for Washington including Iran's missile development and regional activities.

 

Those activities include support for proxies in conflicts roiling countries such as Iraq, Lebanon, Syria and Yemen.

 

Iran has said it could quickly reverse its JCPOA violations if U.S. sanctions are removed but has ruled out talks on its missile programme and its influence in the Middle East, where Iran and Saudi Arabia have fought proxy wars for decades.

 

(Writing by Parisa Hafezi and Arshad Mohammed; Editing by William Maclean and Daniel Wallis)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2021-02-08

 

- Whatever you're going through, the Samaritans are here for you

- Follow Thaivisa on LINE for breaking COVID-19 updates

[ezzra]

The Iranians built their policy on the assumption that, after four years, Obama’s people will come back, and they can go back to stage one and have the bad agreement, which for them was very good, “If this administration will make it clear that it will not go back to square one – that when he Biden spoke about a new and stronger agreement, he meant it – they Iran, will have to reconsider their whole policy. This might succeed.

If, on the contrary, the this administration will remove the sanctions and say, ‘Let’s go back to the old agreement, and then we will negotiate a new one, taking care of all of the loopholes of the old agreement’… there is no chance,

A 50-year deal would be needed to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The 2015 nuclear deal’s 10- to 15-year limit was far too short in the history of nation-states...

from the (Ha'aretz newspapers)

[Chomper Higgot]

2 hours ago, ezzra said:

The Iranians built their policy on the assumption that, after four years, Obama’s people will come back, and they can go back to stage one and have the bad agreement, which for them was very good, “If this administration will make it clear that it will not go back to square one – that when he Biden spoke about a new and stronger agreement, he meant it – they Iran, will have to reconsider their whole policy. This might succeed.

If, on the contrary, the this administration will remove the sanctions and say, ‘Let’s go back to the old agreement, and then we will negotiate a new one, taking care of all of the loopholes of the old agreement’… there is no chance,

A 50-year deal would be needed to limit Iran’s nuclear ambitions. The 2015 nuclear deal’s 10- to 15-year limit was far too short in the history of nation-states...

from the (Ha'aretz newspapers)

‘Obama’s people will come back’.

 

What on earth are you on about? Obama’s Presidencies are over.

 

He was followed by an idiot who let Iran off the leash, now President Biden gets to deal with the mess left behind.

 

 

 

[Tug]

I hope a mutually beneficial agreement can be reached I feel we the USA hold the upper hand it’s Iran beeing hurt by the sanctions not us that beeing said the average Iranian families are paying the price that sucks and imo is morally wrong 

[high plane drifter]

why are you scare of Iran,,   usa is lot more dangers than any others countries

[Kwasaki]

22 minutes ago, high plane drifter said:

why are you scare of Iran,,   USA is lot more dangers than any others countries

Well their God is different for one, another is we have nuclear weapons and we don't want anyone else having them.

[placeholder]

13 minutes ago, Kwasaki said:

Well their God is different for one, another is we have nuclear weapons and we don't want anyone else having them.

Actually, Allah is just an alias. Her real name is still God.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, Chomper Higgot said:

‘Obama’s people will come back’.

 

What on earth are you on about? Obama’s Presidencies are over.

 

He was followed by an idiot who let Iran off the leash, now President Biden gets to deal with the mess left behind.

 

 

 

 

Biden himself was, many times, Obama's point man on Middle East issues. The top State Department officials and those currently in charge of dealing with the situation were deeply involved with the negotiations and formulation of the JCPOA. It's not completely off mark, in this instance, to say that Obama's people are back.

 

I think it's a good thing, though.

[Morch]

And in related news....

 

Iran U.N. Inspectors Find Radioactive Traces, Raising Fresh Concerns

https://www.wsj.com/articles/iran-u-n-inspectors-find-radioactive-traces-raising-fresh-concerns-11612567304

 

 

[Chomper Higgot]

4 hours ago, placeholder said:

Actually, Allah is just an alias. Her real name is still God.

 She has a few other names too.

[Isaan sailor]

Who in their right mind would trust this Iranian regime?  Fool me once—shame on you. Fool me twice—shame on me.

[tonbridgebrit]

2 minutes ago, Isaan sailor said:

Who in their right mind would trust this Iranian regime?  Fool me once—shame on you. Fool me twice—shame on me.

The Iranian regime did not fool the Obama government. The deal was done between Obama and Iran, and planet earth was a safer place.

Trump came along, put the sanctions back on. This might have caused Iran to secretly carry out research on their nuke. So, Trump might have made planet earth a more dangerous place for us to live in.

[tonbridgebrit]

8 hours ago, high plane drifter said:

why are you scare of Iran,,   usa is lot more dangers than any others countries

You're right, America is a lot more dangerous than any other country.  America is actually the biggest threat to world peace.

[tonbridgebrit]

10 hours ago, Tug said:

I hope a mutually beneficial agreement can be reached I feel we the USA hold the upper hand it’s Iran beeing hurt by the sanctions not us that beeing said the average Iranian families are paying the price that sucks and imo is morally wrong 

Yes, the people of Iran are suffering from the sanctions imposed by Trump. The ordinary Iranian families are paying the price.

Does the USA really hold the upper hand ?  I'm not sure about. A continuation of Trump's sanctions will push Iran into making more progress on their nuclear bomb. Yes, Iran suffers from sanctions. But the world will suffer greatly if Iran develops a nuke and actually launches it. Let's hope America will stop any research in nukes by Iran, by removing the cruel sanctions. And giving some aid and loans to Iran will be a step in the right direction.

[Morch]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

The Iranian regime did not fool the Obama government. The deal was done between Obama and Iran, and planet earth was a safer place.

Trump came along, put the sanctions back on. This might have caused Iran to secretly carry out research on their nuke. So, Trump might have made planet earth a more dangerous place for us to live in.

 

More misinformation and nonsense.

 

The JCPOA came about precisely because Iran failed to live up to it's NPT obligations.

 

The JCPOA was not an agreement between Obama and Iran. There are several other parties, and Obama was representing the USA.

 

Obama did not remove all the sanctions on Iran, just the ones that were relevant to the agreement.

 

As for your 'might have caused' bit - if so, Iran was severely breaching the agreement, and the safeguards of the agreement weren't good enough.

 

 

[Morch]

2 hours ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Yes, the people of Iran are suffering from the sanctions imposed by Trump. The ordinary Iranian families are paying the price.

Does the USA really hold the upper hand ?  I'm not sure about. A continuation of Trump's sanctions will push Iran into making more progress on their nuclear bomb. Yes, Iran suffers from sanctions. But the world will suffer greatly if Iran develops a nuke and actually launches it. Let's hope America will stop any research in nukes by Iran, by removing the cruel sanctions. And giving some aid and loans to Iran will be a step in the right direction.

 

Iran claims that it does not develop nor aims to develop a nuclear weapon. You know otherwise? You think otherwise? And if Iran can develop such a weapon despite being under sanctions and surveillance, what's to stop it from doing so without sanctions in place?

 

 

[Tug]

3 hours ago, Isaan sailor said:

Who in their right mind would trust this Iranian regime?  Fool me once—shame on you. Fool me twice—shame on me.

Who in their right mind could trust (us) America after trump broke the treaty for the price of a dog whistle and a piece of meat for his base?the Iranians most likely feel that way who can blame them they dident break the rules trump did in our name dealing another blow to America no sir imo all of trumps policies are bankrupt 

[tonbridgebrit]

7 minutes ago, Tug said:

Who in their right mind could trust (us) America after trump broke the treaty for the price of a dog whistle and a piece of meat for his base?the Iranians most likely feel that way who can blame them they dident break the rules trump did in our name dealing another blow to America no sir imo all of trumps policies are bankrupt 

You're right. Trump put the sanctions back onto Iran. And Iran did nothing to cause Trump to do this. Trump did it because, well, Trump did it.
And seeing as Trump restored sanctions, Iran's incentive to not carry out research on a nuke was taken away.

[tonbridgebrit]

1 hour ago, Morch said:

The JCPOA came about precisely because Iran failed to live up to it's NPT obligations.

 

The JCPOA was not an agreement between Obama and Iran. There are several other parties, and Obama was representing the USA.

 

Obama did not remove all the sanctions on Iran, just the ones that were relevant to the agreement.

 

1 hour ago, Morch said:

Iran claims that it does not develop nor aims to develop a nuclear weapon. You know otherwise? You think otherwise? And if Iran can develop such a weapon despite being under sanctions and surveillance, what's to stop it from doing so without sanctions in place?

 

 

Morch, the entire point of the talks are to stop Iran carrying out research and making progress on developing a nuclear bomb. That's the goal. The lifting of sanctions by Obama was a benefit given to Iran, because they weren't carrying out developments on their nuke. Or, we can change that to, they will not be carrying out developments on their nuke in the future.

The sanctions removed by Obama, but restored by Trump.  A poster has already said that Iran is sufferring from these sanctions, the pain is being felt by ordinary Iranian families. Surely, you realise this ?

What's the problem with harming Iran using these sanctions ?  Simple, they might go ahead and make progress on getting their bomb.

"And if Iran can develop such a weapon despite being under sanctions and surveillance, what's to stop it from doing so without sanctions in place? "   Yes, if Iran wanted to, they've got the ability to make progress on their nuke, with or without sanctions. It's their choice. Putting sanctions on them does not guarantee a non-nuclear Iran. Obama lifted the sanctions and Iran did not carry out research on their bomb.

An obvious strategy would be this.  Remove sanctions on Iran, and give them aid and loans in instalments, in return for this nuclear agreement. And if Iran does detonate a nuke in the future, well, then consider restoring sanctions, and consider removal of the instalments of aid and loans.

Edited February 8, 2021 by tonbridgebrit

[Sujo]

6 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Morch, the entire point of the talks are to stop Iran carrying out research and making progress on developing a nuclear bomb. That's the goal. The lifting of sanctions by Obama was a benefit given to Iran, because they weren't carrying out developments on their nuke. Or, we can change that to, they will not be carrying out developments on their nuke in the future.

The sanctions removed by Obama, but restored by Trump.  A poster has already said that Iran is sufferring from these sanctions, the pain is being felt by ordinary Iranian families. Surely, you realise this ?

What's the problem with harming Iran using these sanctions ?  Simple, they might go ahead and make progress on getting their bomb.

"And if Iran can develop such a weapon despite being under sanctions and surveillance, what's to stop it from doing so without sanctions in place? "   Yes, if Iran wanted to, they've got the ability to make progress on their nuke, with or without sanctions. It's their choice. Putting sanctions on them does not guarantee a non-nuclear Iran. Obama lifted the sanctions and Iran did not carry out research on their bomb.

An obvious strategy would be this.  Remove sanctions on Iran, and give them aid and loans in instalments, in return for this nuclear agreement. And if Iran does detonate a nuke in the future, well, then consider restoring sanctions, and consider removal of the instalments of aid and loans.

Correct. And if Iran is systematically punished even by adhering to the agreement then i cannot blame them for advancing the technology.

 

its not like the us or israel can be trusted.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

 

Morch, the entire point of the talks are to stop Iran carrying out research and making progress on developing a nuclear bomb. That's the goal. The lifting of sanctions by Obama was a benefit given to Iran, because they weren't carrying out developments on their nuke. Or, we can change that to, they will not be carrying out developments on their nuke in the future.

The sanctions removed by Obama, but restored by Trump.  A poster has already said that Iran is sufferring from these sanctions, the pain is being felt by ordinary Iranian families. Surely, you realise this ?

What's the problem with harming Iran using these sanctions ?  Simple, they might go ahead and make progress on getting their bomb.

"And if Iran can develop such a weapon despite being under sanctions and surveillance, what's to stop it from doing so without sanctions in place? "   Yes, if Iran wanted to, they've got the ability to make progress on their nuke, with or without sanctions. It's their choice. Putting sanctions on them does not guarantee a non-nuclear Iran. Obama lifted the sanctions and Iran did not carry out research on their bomb.

An obvious strategy would be this.  Remove sanctions on Iran, and give them aid and loans in instalments, in return for this nuclear agreement. And if Iran does detonate a nuke, well, then consider restoring sanctions, and consider removal of the instalments of aid and loans.

 

Get your argument in order.

 

You claimed Iran doesn't fool anyone. But Iran said it does not develop nuclear arms nor aims too. Your new comments assert it does or might do so. Decide which option you're shooting for.

 

The sanctions were removed after Iran complied with former obligations, and was put under sever inspection regime. Not quite your simple version.

 

Spare me the faux drama about suffering, Iran's leaders can set their priorities by themselves.

 

If Iran can research, develop and produce nuclear weapons regardless of the agreement being in place, than the agreement is useless. The sanctions aren't the issue with regard to this point.

 

Your 'obvious strategy' is not even related to the agreement. You're just making up stuff as usual. The agreement is not supposed to let Iran come near enough to detonate anything.

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, Sujo said:

Correct. And if Iran is systematically punished even by adhering to the agreement then i cannot blame them for advancing the technology.

 

its not like the us or israel can be trusted.

 

Iran is not systematically punished. There was Trump and his sanctions, now there is no Trump, and a way to make things better is being sought. Naturally, parties try to get the best outcome for their own interests, given the present circumstances.

 

Unless mistaken, Biden's position is that Iran go first by reverting to enriching uranium on the level set by the agreement, whereas Iran's stance is that the sanctions go first. I'm pretty sure they'll find some middle ground.

 

Iran is not trusted either - or else there wouldn't be a JCPOA and an inspections regime.

[tonbridgebrit]

17 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Get your argument in order.

 

You claimed Iran doesn't fool anyone. But Iran said it does not develop nuclear arms nor aims too. Your new comments assert it does or might do so. Decide which option you're shooting for.

 

The sanctions were removed after Iran complied with former obligations, and was put under sever inspection regime. Not quite your simple version.

 

Spare me the faux drama about suffering, Iran's leaders can set their priorities by themselves.

 

If Iran can research, develop and produce nuclear weapons regardless of the agreement being in place, than the agreement is useless. The sanctions aren't the issue with regard to this point.

 

Your 'obvious strategy' is not even related to the agreement. You're just making up stuff as usual. The agreement is not supposed to let Iran come near enough to detonate anything.

Stop being hypocritical, sort out your own argument.

You don't like Trump, and much prefer Obama. I reckon Trump's Iran policy has been cruel and wrong. If Hillary Clinton had of won that 2016 election, well, planet earth would not be in this nuclear mess. If Hillary had of won, Obama's policy would have been carried on.

Obama's policy. That would have meant no restoring of sanctions, which is what Trump did. That would have meant no pain for Iran for four years. And no need for us to be concerned about Iran making progress on a nuke.

You go and say that Obama was better than Trump. But you're refusing to condemn Trump for what he did, and that's restoring sanctions on Iran.

[Morch]

2 minutes ago, tonbridgebrit said:

Stop being hypocritical, sort out your own argument.

You don't like Trump, and much prefer Obama. I reckon Trump's Iran policy has been cruel and wrong. If Hillary Clinton had of won that 2016 election, well, planet earth would not be in this nuclear mess. If Hillary had of won, Obama's policy would have been carried on.

Obama's policy. That would have meant no restoring of sanctions, which is what Trump did. That would have meant no pain for Iran for four years. And no need for us to be concerned about Iran making progress on a nuke.

You go and say that Obama was better than Trump. But you're refusing to condemn Trump for what he did, and that's restoring sanctions on Iran.

 

May I advice you again to look up 'hypocritical'? It doesn't mean what you think it means.

 

As for the rest. HRC did not win the elections. She's irrelevant to the topic.

 

Obama did not remove all sanctions from Iran. Guess that will be ignored again.

 

Sanctions being removed from Iran did not do away with concerns about Iran trying to develop nuclear arms, that's what the inspections regime is for. No one trusts Iran on that score, sanctions or no sanctions.

 

You're making up stuff about my positions. I have made many comments asserting Trump's policies vs. Iran were misguided, wrong, and ultimately not the best course of action.

 

Trump's sanctions are in place, however. And they exert heavy pressure on the Iranian regime. The Biden administration is either (1) not about to take Iran's work it will play by the rules, given the precedent (look up the Iran's issues with the NPT, which made the JCPOA come about), and/or (2) play the card Trump left for extra gains (amending/expanding the agreement). This might not be "playing nice", but often, that's how international relations work. No need to pretend being naive about it.

 

I doubt that the current "crisis" will not be resolved in the very near future.