Kerry implores Congress to back Iran nuclear deal

[webfact]

Kerry implores Congress to back Iran nuclear deal
By DEB RIECHMANN

WASHINGTON (AP) — Secretary of State John Kerry warned skeptical lawmakers not to nix the contentious nuclear deal with Iran, insisting that it includes strict inspections and other safeguards to deter cheating by Tehran.

"If Congress does not support the deal, we would see this deal die — with no other options," Kerry told the House Foreign Affairs Committee on Tuesday as he testified for the second time in a week, part of the Obama administration's all-out campaign to sell the accord.

Kerry spoke as the administration picked up critical support for the deal from Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., a strong supporter of Israel who referred to his Jewish background in announcing his decision.

"I believe the agreement offers the best option to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon," Levin said in a statement circulated by Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., who is leading the effort to round up Democratic support for the deal in the House.

Congress has begun a 60-day review of the international agreement that curbs Iran's nuclear program in exchange for billions of dollars in relief from sanctions stifling its economy. All members must weigh the deal, but it's especially a tough decision for those who have a large number of Jewish constituencies because Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has called it a "historic mistake."

"Iran has cheated on every agreement they've signed," said Rep. Ed Royce, the panel's chairman. With Kerry, Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz and Treasury Secretary Jack Lew waiting to testify, he asked if Tehran "has earned the right to be trusted" given its history.

Few, if any, new details emerged from the more than three-hour hearing. Some committee members asked the three officials questions, while others used their time to read lengthy statements in opposition. That left Kerry visibly frustrated and several times he accused the members of misconstruing or misunderstanding the details of the agreement.

"Nothing in this deal is built on trust. Nothing," Kerry said.

Kerry was asked what would prevent Iran from adhering to the agreement for a short time, and then, in effect, take the money and run toward building an atomic bomb.

Kerry said that was not a likely scenario. He said the Iranian government is under pressure to improve the economy in their country where half the population is under 30 years of age and wants jobs. And he defended the inspection protocol under the agreement, arguing that if Iran tries to develop a nuclear weapon covertly, the international community will know.

"They can't do that. Because the red flags that would go off — the bells and whistles that would start chiming — as a result of any movement away from what they have to do" to meet their obligations under the agreement, Kerry said.

Faced with Republican majorities in both houses, the administration's objective was to line up enough support for Obama among Democrats in what is all but certain to become a veto fight this fall.

Congress is expected to vote in September to prevent Obama from lifting sanctions imposed previously by lawmakers, a step that would likely cause Iran to walk away from the agreement. Obama has said he will veto any bill along those lines, and Republicans will need a two-thirds majority in both houses to override his objections.

Apart from Royce, the panel's senior Democrat expressed reservations about the plan. Rep. Eliot Engel of New York said he has "serious questions and concerns about this deal."

Engel is a strong supporter of Israel, which vociferously opposes the agreement. Iran has said it wants to wipe out Israel.

The hearing unfolded as the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, a pro-Israel lobby, dispatched hundreds of its members to prod lawmakers to disapprove of the deal.

On the other side of the issue, seven former U.S. diplomats and State Department officials sent a letter Monday to leaders in Congress urging them to support the pact.

While lawmakers debated the implications of the deal, officials from member nations of the International Atomic Energy Agency told The Associated Press that Iran may be allowed to take soil samples at the Parchin military complex that is suspected as a site of nuclear weapon research, but only under monitoring by outside experts.

The officials said stringent oversight of the soil-sampling could include video monitoring. The samples would be analyzed by the agency for traces left by any nuclear experiments. The disclosures come from IAEA member nations and are tasked with following Iran's nuclear program. They demanded anonymity because their information is confidential. The IAEA had no immediate comment.

Tehran insists Parchin is a conventional military area with no link to nuclear tests.
___

Associated Press writer George Jahn in Vienna contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-07-29

[kamahele]

As usual, our Congress embarrasses all of us with their behavior at this hearing. Calling the Secretary of State to the hearing and not allowing him time to answer questions as they are just using the hearings to grandstand for the public. Shameless.

[sdanielmcev]

Kerry is trying to bamboozle Congress. It ain't working. Kerry is no statesman. Effete snobbery does not work. Maybe he should offer them free ketchup.

[Ulysses G.]

No one, with any sense, in either party is buying this pact. It will be interesting to see if they can be honest for a change, ignore partisanship and vote down this pathetic deal.

[up-country_sinclair]

the administration picked up critical support for the deal from Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., a strong supporter of Israel who referred to his Jewish background in announcing his decision.

"I believe the agreement offers the best option to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon," Levin said in a statement

Yes, the best option for America, the P5+1 and the world community.

This was a superbly negotiated deal by the all the members of the P5+ 1.

One has to question the genuine allegiance of those alleged Americans who are so vociferously opposed to this deal.

[elgordo38]

Kerry is trying to bamboozle Congress. It ain't working. Kerry is no statesman. Effete snobbery does not work. Maybe he should offer them free ketchup.

His wife no longer owns Heinz Warren Buffet does. After the buying binge is over around the globe Warren will be one of the last men left standing. Kerry mantra is "A bad deal is better than no deal" what a sham. This deal like the TPP will pass after much arm twisting and pork barreling in Congress. Israel will be compensated by being given access to the new "What makes the B61-12 bomb the most dangerous nuclear weapon in America’s arsenal is its usability," Keck writes. "This usability derives from a combination of its accuracy and low-yield." Obama wants to leave a positive legacy and unfortunately you and I will be a part of it good or bad.

[Chicog]

Congress can do whatever it likes.

It doesn't run the world. The rest of the partners will go ahead and ease their sanctions and the inspectors will be allowed to do their work.

Meanwhile a bunch of overpaid handwringers will crow about their "win" while everyone else goes back to doing business with Iran.

[Berkshire]

Congress can do whatever it likes.

It doesn't run the world. The rest of the partners will go ahead and ease their sanctions and the inspectors will be allowed to do their work.

Meanwhile a bunch of overpaid handwringers will crow about their "win" while everyone else goes back to doing business with Iran.

I'd imagine some major US companies will be plenty upset if they are left out in the cold and forced to continue with sanctions while other countries/companies slither right in.

[chuckd]

the administration picked up critical support for the deal from Rep. Sander Levin, D-Mich., a strong supporter of Israel who referred to his Jewish background in announcing his decision.

"I believe the agreement offers the best option to prevent Iran from acquiring a nuclear weapon," Levin said in a statement

Yes, the best option for America, the P5+1 and the world community.

This was a superbly negotiated deal by the all the members of the P5+ 1.

One has to question the genuine allegiance of those alleged Americans who are so vociferously opposed to this deal.

Question away.

[Steely Dan]

If he has any integrity Charles Schumer should vote against the deal and encourage others to do likewise based on his own stated criteria.

http://www.breitbart.com/big-government/2015/07/27/iran-deal-fails-4-of-schumers-5-demands/

[Chicog]

Since it's patently obvious that most of the people decrying this deal have not got a clue what is in it, someone has kindly posted a summary at Wiki. I can't be ar$ed going through deleting all the references, so forgive me.

Link at the end.

I'm sure some of you can take the time to read this post before you next start banging on about how bad (or good!) a deal it is without even knowing what's in it.

Who knows, maybe we can have some sensible discussion about the relative merits of each part based on some kind of understanding of what they are.

Summary of provisions[edit]

The ministers of foreign affairs (shown from left to right) of China, France, Germany, the European Union, Iran, the United Kingdom, and the United States announcing the successful conclusion of negotiations for the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, in Vienna, Austria, 14 July 2015.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) runs to 109 pages, including five annexes.^[7] Major provisions of the final accord include the following:^[19][7]

Nuclear[edit]

• Iran, with cooperation from the "Working Group" (E3/EU+3 and possibly other countries), will modernise and rebuild the Arak heavy water research reactor based on an agreed design to support its peaceful nuclear research and production needs and purposes, but in such a way to minimise the production of plutonium and not to produce weapons-grade plutonium. The power of the redesigned reactor will not exceed 20 MWth. E3/EU+3 parties will support and facilitate the timely and safe construction of the Arak complex.^[20] All spent fuel will be sent out of the country.^[5] All excess heavy water which is beyond Iran's needs for the modernised reactor will be made available for export to the international market based on international prices. For 15 years, Iran will not engage in, or research on, spent fuel reprocessing.^[21] Iran will also not build any additional heavy-water reactors or accumulate heavy water for fifteen years.^[5]
• For 10 years, Iran will reduce by at least two-thirds the number of its centrifuges (tube-shaped machines used to enrich uranium), from its current stockpile of 19,000 centrifuges (of which 10,000 were operational) to no more than 6,104, with only 5,060 allowed to enrich uranium,^[7][22] with the enrichment capacity being limited to the Natanz plant. The centrifuges there must be IR-1 centrifuges, the first-generation centrifuge type which is Iran's oldest and least efficient; Iran will give up its advanced IR-2M centrifuges in this period.^[5][23][24] The decommissioned centrifuges will be stored in Natanz and will be monitored by IAEA.^[25][26] Iran will not build any new uranium-enrichment facilities for fifteen years.^[22]
• Iran may continue research and development work on enrichment, but that work will take place only at the Natanz facility and include certain limitations for the first eight years.^[5] This is intended to keep the country to a breakout time of one year.^[22]

• Iran's Fordow facility will stop enriching uranium and researching uranium enrichment for at least fifteen years; the facility will be converted into a nuclear, physics and technology center. For 15 years, Fordow will maintain no more than 1,044 IR-1 centrifuges in six cascades in one wing of Fordow. "Two of those six cascades will spin without uranium and will be transitioned, including through appropriate infrastructure modification," for stable radioisotope production for medical, agricultural, industrial, and scientific use. "The other four cascades with all associated infrastructure will remain idle." Iran will not be permitted to have any fissile material in Fordow.^[22][5][24]

• Iran's current stockpile of low-enriched uranium will be reduced by 98 percent, from 10,000 kg to 300 kg. This reduction will be maintained for at least fifteen years.^{[7][22][23][24]} For the same fifteen-year period, Iran will be limited to enriching uranium to 3.67%, a percentage sufficient for civilian nuclear power and research, but not for building a nuclear weapon.^[22][27][23] This is a "major decline" in Iran's previous nuclear activity; prior to watering down its stockpile pursuant to the Joint Plan of Action interim agreement, Iran had enriched uranium to near 20% (medium-enriched uranium).^[22][23][24] These enriched uranium in excess of 300 kg of up to 3.67% will be down blended to natural uranium level or be sold in return for natural uranium, and the uranium enriched to between 5% and 20% will be fabricated into fuel plates for the Tehran Research Reactor or sold or diluted to an enrichment level of 3.67%. The implementation of the commercial contracts will be facilitated by P5+1.^[28]

• Iran will implement an Additional Protocol agreement which will continue in perpetuity for as long as Iran remains a party to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT). The signing of the Additional Protocol represents a continuation of the monitoring and verification provisions "long after the comprehensive agreement between the P5+1 and Iran is implemented."^[29]

• A comprehensive inspections regime will be implemented; Iran will be required to allow IAEA inspectors to all of its declared facilities, including the Parchin military facility, in order to monitor and confirm that Iran is complying with its obligations and is not diverting any fissile material.^[22][23]

• • The IAEA will have multilayered^[30] oversight "over Iran's entire nuclear supply chain, from uranium mills to its procurement of nuclear-related technologies."^[31] For declared nuclear sites such as Fordow and Natanz, the IAEA will have "round-the-clock access" to nuclear facilities and will be entitled to maintain continuous monitoring (including via surveillance equipment) at such sites.^[32][31] The agreement authorizes the IAEA to make use of sophisticated monitoring technology, such as fiber-optic seals on equipment that can electronically send information to the IAEA; infrared satellite imagery to detect covert sites, "environmental sensors that can detect minute signs of nuclear particles"; tamper-resistant, radiation-resistant cameras.^[33][17] Other tools include computerized accounting programs to gather information and detect anomalies, and big data sets on Iranian imports, to monitor dual-use items.^[30]
  • The number of IAEA inspectors assigned to Iran will triple, from 50 to 150 inspectors.^[17]
  • If IAEA inspectors have concerns that Iran is developing nuclear capabilities at any non-declared sites, they may request access "to verify the absence of undeclared nuclear materials and activities or activities inconsistent with" the agreement, informing Iran of the basis for their concerns.^[32] The inspectors would only come from countries with which Iran has diplomatic relations.^[34] Iran may admit the inspectors to such site or propose alternatives to inspection that might satisfy the IAEA's concerns.^[32] If such an agreement cannot be reached, a process running to a maximum of 24 days is triggered.^[32] Under this process, Iran and the IAEA have 14 days to resolve disagreements among themselves.^[32] If they fail to, the Joint Commission (including all eight parties) would have one week in which to consider the intelligence which initiated the IAEA request. A majority of the Commission (at least five of the eight members) could then inform Iran of the action that it would be required to take within three more days.^[35][36]The majority rule provision "means the United States and its European allies—Britain, France, Germany and the EU—could insist on access or any other steps and that Iran, Russia or China could not veto them."^[35] If Iran did not comply with the decision within three days, sanctions would be automatically reimposed under the snapback provision (see below).^[36]

As a result of the above, the "breakout time"—the time in which it would be possible for Iran to make enough material for a single nuclear weapon should Iran abandon the agreement—will increase from two to three months to one year; this would be in place for ten years.^[7][22]

JCPOA summary of nuclear provisions^[37] Capability Before JCPOA After JCPOA First-generation
centrifuges installed 19,138 6,104 Advanced centrifuges installed 1,034 0 Breakout time 1–2 months 1 year Centrifuge R&D Unconstrained Constrained Stockpile of
low-enriched uranium 19,211 lbs 660 lbs Stockpile of
medium-enriched uranium 430 lbs 0 lbs

Sanctions[edit]

• No new UN or EU nuclear-related sanctions or restrictive measures will be imposed.^[38]
• The UN Security Council, United States and the European Union would lift all of their previous nuclear-related sanctions against Iran (specified in Annex II of the agreement) after the IAEA verifies that several key steps have been taken.^[39]
  • Sanctions relating to ballistic missile technologies would remain for eight years; similar sanctions on conventional weapon sales to Iran would remain for five years.^[7][40]
  • Eight years into the agreement, EU sanctions against a number of Iranian companies and individuals (such as Qasem Soleimani) will be lifted.^[41]
  • However, all U.S. sanctions against Iran related to alleged human rights abuses, missiles, and support for terrorism are not affected by the agreement and will remain in place.^[42][24] U.S. sanctions are viewed as more stringent, since many have extraterritorial effect (i.e., they apply worldwide). EU sanctions, by contrast, apply only in Europe.^[41]

• If Iran violates the agreement, an automatic "snap back" provision takes effect, under which the sanctions "snap back" into place (i.e., are reimplemented).^[22][23][38]
  • Specifically, the JCPOA establishes the following dispute resolution process: if a party to the JCPOA has reason to believe that another party is not upholding its commitments under the agreement, then the complaining party may refer its complaint to the Joint Commission, a body created under the JCPOA to monitor implementation.^[43][24] If a complaint made by a non-Iran party is not resolved to the satisfaction of the complaining party within thirty-five days of referral, then that party could treat the unresolved issue as grounds to cease performing its commitments under the JCPOA, notify the United Nations Security Council that it believes the issue constitutes significant non-performance, or both.^[43] The Security Council would then have thirty days to adopt a resolution to continue the lifting of sanctions. If such a resolution is not adopted within those thirty days, then the sanctions of all of the pre-JCPOA nuclear-related UN Security Council resolutions would automatically be re-imposed.^[43][16] The effect of this rule is that any permanent member of the Security Council (the U.S., Britain, China, Russia and France) can veto any ongoing sanctions relief, but no member can veto the re-imposition of sanctions. The result is to make impossible any scenario where Iran is non-compliant with the JCPOA yet escapes re-imposition of sanctions.^[43]
  • Snapback sanctions "would not apply with retroactive effect to contracts signed between any party and Iran or Iranian individuals and entities prior to the date of application, provided that the activities contemplated under and execution of such contracts are consistent with this JCPOA and the previous and current UN Security Council resolutions."^[25]

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Joint_Comprehensive_Plan_of_Action

Edited July 29, 2015 by Chicog

[Nobb]

Iran has cheated and lied just as most Muslim countries do to get the deal they want. Kerry does not have any foreign affair experience in his political resume. He tried to run for president but the public knew that he was not qualified. His wife has more money then him and supports his campaigns. Her married name before Kerry was Heinz as in Heinz ketchup.

[Chicog]

Iran has cheated and lied just as most Muslim countries do to get the deal they want. Kerry does not have any foreign affair experience in his political resume. He tried to run for president but the public knew that he was not qualified. His wife has more money then him and supports his campaigns. Her married name before Kerry was Heinz as in Heinz ketchup.

He wasn't talking to them on his own you know.

[chuckd]

Just a quick question...what about the side deals not forming a part of this agreement?

[Steely Dan]

What of the IAEA having to accept soil samples from the Parchin nuclear site taken by the Iranians?

[/http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-n99cfSWTpvA/VbcJqB3H-UI/AAAAAAAAq38/Fp4r4fNw0mw/s1600/kerry%2Bchoice.png

[dexterm]

Iran has cheated and lied just as most Muslim countries do to get the deal they want. Kerry does not have any foreign affair experience in his political resume. He tried to run for president but the public knew that he was not qualified. His wife has more money then him and supports his campaigns. Her married name before Kerry was Heinz as in Heinz ketchup.

Your first sentence is racist/religionist/xenophobic nonsense. And what on earth has Heinz ketchup got to do with an Iran nuclear deal.

[Chicog]

What of the IAEA having to accept soil samples from the Parchin nuclear site taken by the Iranians?

[/http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-n99cfSWTpvA/VbcJqB3H-UI/AAAAAAAAq38/Fp4r4fNw0mw/s1600/kerry%2Bchoice.png

Can you provide a link please, as opposed to a joke.

[Steely Dan]

What of the IAEA having to accept soil samples from the Parchin nuclear site taken by the Iranians?

[/http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-n99cfSWTpvA/VbcJqB3H-UI/AAAAAAAAq38/Fp4r4fNw0mw/s1600/kerry%2Bchoice.png

Can you provide a link please, as opposed to a joke.

Ask Kerry and Obama, they started it. And while we're at it can you find ANY source that denies the 24 days delay in inspectors gaining access to any Iranian site or that the Iranians themselves will supply soil samples from Parchin. Edited July 29, 2015 by Steely Dan

[chuckd]

What of the IAEA having to accept soil samples from the Parchin nuclear site taken by the Iranians?

[/http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-n99cfSWTpvA/VbcJqB3H-UI/AAAAAAAAq38/Fp4r4fNw0mw/s1600/kerry%2Bchoice.png

Can you provide a link please, as opposed to a joke.

Will any of these help?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421550/iran-nuclear-bombshell-Iran-police-itself

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-secret-iran-deals-exposed/2015/07/27/26d14dbc-3460-11e5-8e66-07b4603ec92a_story.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/28/iran-soil-tests/

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/e1ccf648e18a4788ac94861a3bc1b966/officials-iran-may-take-own-samples-alleged-nuclear-site

[Jingthing]

Well, I think ultimately they won't have enough votes to override an Obama veto if it even gets to that.

I think the way Obama-Kerry set it up so that even if it was rejected lots of it still goes forward basically castrates Congress anyway.

[pedro01]

"They can't do that. Because the red flags that would go off — the bells and whistles that would start chiming — as a result of any movement away from what they have to do""

Aaah - bells & whistles would start chiming.

Well - as long as there's bells & whistles, nothing to worry about.

What I don't understand is why Iran needs any nuclear research or 6000 centrifuges at all.

[Chicog]

What of the IAEA having to accept soil samples from the Parchin nuclear site taken by the Iranians?

[/http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-n99cfSWTpvA/VbcJqB3H-UI/AAAAAAAAq38/Fp4r4fNw0mw/s1600/kerry%2Bchoice.png

Can you provide a link please, as opposed to a joke.

Will any of these help?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421550/iran-nuclear-bombshell-Iran-police-itself

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-secret-iran-deals-exposed/2015/07/27/26d14dbc-3460-11e5-8e66-07b4603ec92a_story.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/28/iran-soil-tests/

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/e1ccf648e18a4788ac94861a3bc1b966/officials-iran-may-take-own-samples-alleged-nuclear-site

Oh that's OK then. For a minute I thought he was claiming it's a done deal.

"....a final agreement has not yet been reached."

[impulse]

Since it's patently obvious that most of the people decrying this deal have not got a clue what is in it, someone has kindly posted a summary at Wiki. I can't be ar$ed going through deleting all the references, so forgive me.

Why would we want to read all of those big words?

We can listen to the geniuses on the television news shows and know more than Wikipedia in 5 minutes or less...

[Chicog]

Since it's patently obvious that most of the people decrying this deal have not got a clue what is in it, someone has kindly posted a summary at Wiki. I can't be ar$ed going through deleting all the references, so forgive me.

Why would we want to read all of those big words?

We can listen to the geniuses on the television news shows and know more than Wikipedia in 5 minutes or less...

Without actually reading anything about it!

Edited July 29, 2015 by Chicog

[impulse]

Since it's patently obvious that most of the people decrying this deal have not got a clue what is in it, someone has kindly posted a summary at Wiki. I can't be ar$ed going through deleting all the references, so forgive me.

Why would we want to read all of those big words?

We can listen to the geniuses on the television news shows and know more than Wikipedia in 5 minutes or less...

Without actually reading anything about it!

It is SO much easier to have my opinions spoon fed to me...

[sdanielmcev]

Since it's patently obvious that most of the people decrying this deal have not got a clue what is in it, someone has kindly posted a summary at Wiki. I can't be ar$ed going through deleting all the references, so forgive me.

Why would we want to read all of those big words?

We can listen to the geniuses on the television news shows and know more than Wikipedia in 5 minutes or less...

Hear! Hear! That's the problem. These 'interpreters' spin it any way they want, so the intellectually lazy can go back to their Cheetos and reality shows. Of course they're the most verbose and vociferous.(word too big?) And shout insults instead of argueing the idea.

[chuckd]

What of the IAEA having to accept soil samples from the Parchin nuclear site taken by the Iranians?

[/http://1.bp.blogspot.com/-n99cfSWTpvA/VbcJqB3H-UI/AAAAAAAAq38/Fp4r4fNw0mw/s1600/kerry%2Bchoice.png

Can you provide a link please, as opposed to a joke.

Will any of these help?

http://www.nationalreview.com/article/421550/iran-nuclear-bombshell-Iran-police-itself

https://www.washingtonpost.com/opinions/obamas-secret-iran-deals-exposed/2015/07/27/26d14dbc-3460-11e5-8e66-07b4603ec92a_story.html

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/07/28/iran-soil-tests/

http://bigstory.ap.org/article/e1ccf648e18a4788ac94861a3bc1b966/officials-iran-may-take-own-samples-alleged-nuclear-site

Oh that's OK then. For a minute I thought he was claiming it's a done deal.

"....a final agreement has not yet been reached."

"....a final agreement has not yet been reached."...on what?

This part of the discussion about the agreement is about the side agreements between the IAEA and Iran.

Are you now claiming these side deals do not exist or they haven't been agreed to by Iran and the IAEA? What are you saying or is that just another one liner.

Kerry needs to come up with some answers for Congress. He hasn't done a very good job of selling this idiocy.

You're the self proclaimed expert on the agreement. What does the agreement say about the side deals?

[chuckd]

Here is Secretary Kerry side stepping some questions about the side deals. There seems to be a lot this Secretary doesn't know.

[NeverSure]

Here is Secretary Kerry side stepping some questions about the side deals. There seems to be a lot this Secretary doesn't know.

He says "We can't reveal the details to the American people". Bastard.

Of course those details have already been revealed to America's enemies on the Security Council: China, France, Russia, and the United Kingdom.

[losworld]

This will likely get blocked as Israel does not want this deal just like they don't want a Palestinian peace agreement. The dog and pony show continues.