Iran says new U.S. sanctions violate nuclear deal, vows 'proportional reaction'

[webfact]

Iran says new U.S. sanctions violate nuclear deal, vows 'proportional reaction'

 

Iran's top nuclear negotiator Abbas Araqchi talks to journalists after meeting senior officials from the United States, Russia, China, Britain, Germany and France in a hotel in Vienna, Austria, October 19, 2015. REUTERS/Heinz-Peter Bader/File Photo

 

(Reuters) - Iran said new sanctions imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday break the terms of its nuclear deal with the United States and other world powers, and vowed an "appropriate and proportional" response.

 

Trump, who during his election campaign called the nuclear agreement - negotiated under his predecessor Barack Obama - "the worst deal ever", signed the new sanctions into law along with measures against Russia and North Korea.

 

Iran had already said it would complain to the body that oversees the 2015 deal - under which it accepted curbs on its nuclear programme in return for sanctions relief - about the measures passed in Congress last week in response to a missile development programme and human rights abuses.

 

"In our view the nuclear deal has been violated and we will show an appropriate and proportional reaction to this issue," Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi said in an interview with state TV, according to the ISNA news agency.

 

While Russia has reacted to the sanctions by ejecting U.S. embassy staff, Iran has no diplomatic relations or direct trade links with the United States so its options are limited. Araqchi said Tehran's response would be "intelligent".

 

"The main goal of America in approving these sanctions against Iran is to destroy the nuclear deal and we will show a very intelligent reaction to this action," Araqchi said.

 

"We are definitely not going to act in a way that get us entangled in the politics of the American government and Trump."

 

The new U.S. sanctions, signed a day before Iranian President Hassan Rouhani takes part in a ceremony before being sworn in for a second term, are likely to embolden his hardline critics who say the nuclear deal was a form of capitulation.

 

The United States is one of six countries to sign up to the deal with Iran, and the others - Russia, China, Britain, France and Germany - have said they see it as a success in easing concerns that Iran might be trying to develop nuclear weapons.

 

The deal has also meant European countries flocking back to invest in oil-rich Iran, with France's Total agreeing to develop a new phase of the South Pars gas field, the world's largest.

 

Araqchi said the Europeans would not allow Trump to destroy the nuclear deal.

 

"What Total did and the contract that was signed between this company and Iran sent a message from Europe to the Americans that whatever the conditions they will continue their economic relations with Iran," he said.

 

In a separate announcement, Tehran confirmed that Rouhani would keep on two important ministers for his second term: Oil Minister Bijan Zanganeh, who is largely credited for closing the Total deal, and Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran's lead negotiator in the nuclear agreement.

 

(Reporting by Babak Dehghanpisheh; Writing by Robin Pomeroy; Editing by Louise Ireland)

 

-- © Copyright Reuters 2017-08-03

[Dave67]

"In our view, the nuclear deal has been violated and we will show an appropriate and proportional reaction to this issue," 

 

Why did he say  "In our View" makes it sound like he's not 100% positive they are breaking the deal.

 

On the other hand with the new sanctions, he can be positive they going to break the deal

[Golgota]

24 minutes ago, Dave67 said:

"In our view, the nuclear deal has been violated and we will show an appropriate and proportional reaction to this issue," 

 

Why did he say  "In our View" makes it sound like he's not 100% positive they are breaking the deal.

 

On the other hand with the new sanctions, he can be positive they going to break the deal

Well, the deal was made and Iran followed agreed to it, the US even recognized the deal was made and followed by Iran, but Trump and his Administration said the "Idea of the nuclear deal" is not...

 

[Rancid]

More sanctions. Seem to recall that the embargo on Germany in the 30's was widely regarded as a contributing factor to WW2. In fact wasn't there also sanctions on Japan as well? Hmm.

 

Just as well we have nothing to learn from history or you might draw some unpleasant conclusions as to where all this is going...

[Morch]

4 hours ago, Dave67 said:

"In our view, the nuclear deal has been violated and we will show an appropriate and proportional reaction to this issue," 

 

Why did he say  "In our View" makes it sound like he's not 100% positive they are breaking the deal.

 

On the other hand with the new sanctions, he can be positive they going to break the deal

 

Diplomatic posturing. Declaring the agreement violated and possibly void, may be taking things too far - and perhaps too risky a move. Scoring points plays better for now.

 

 

[Srikcir]

12 hours ago, webfact said:

Iran said new sanctions imposed by U.S. President Donald Trump on Wednesday break the terms of its nuclear deal with the United States and other world powers

No it does not but I can see Iran's confusion listening to Trump rather than reading the actual sanctions placed by the US Congress. Foreign leaders have to learn not to listen to Trump's words but to look at actual actions. The nuclear deal remains untouched and compliance certified.

 

But the Trump administration needs to carefully craft its official policy statements rather than Trump literally shooting off his mouth (ie., via tweet). He needs to separate Iran's nuclear deal compliance from Iran's terrorist support and development of a nuclear capacity missile. He further needs to coordinate sanctions with US allies to assure he has their cooperation rather than their opposition. A hard role for the POTUS-who-would-be-king.

[nasanews]

Iran did not have plans to build nuclear power plant, it was camouflage and Iranians were awarded by Obama administration for their military support to Assad regime against Syrian rebels.

[Morch]

8 hours ago, nasanews said:

Iran did not have plans to build nuclear power plant, it was camouflage and Iranians were awarded by Obama administration for their military support to Assad regime against Syrian rebels.

 

Doubt you have anything credible to support this nonsense conspiracy theory. Especially considering:

 

Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant

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

 

Russia Reaches Deal With Iran to Construct Nuclear Plants

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/world/europe/russia-to-build-2-nuclear-plants-in-iran-and-possibly-6-more.html

 

Edited August 4, 2017 by Morch

[nasanews]

11 hours ago, Morch said:

 

Doubt you have anything credible to support this nonsense conspiracy theory. Especially considering:

 

Bushehr Nuclear Power Plant

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

 

Russia Reaches Deal With Iran to Construct Nuclear Plants

https://www.nytimes.com/2014/11/12/world/europe/russia-to-build-2-nuclear-plants-in-iran-and-possibly-6-more.html

 

If Iran wants to have nuclear they could do underneath the ground.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, nasanews said:

If Iran wants to have nuclear they could do underneath the ground.

 

And if you wanted to make sense, you could have posted something sensible. Alas...

Edited August 4, 2017 by Morch

[nasanews]

10 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

And if you wanted to make sense, you could have posted something sensible. Alas...

I disguise those who believe in conspiracy, I am logical human being, what happens have reasons ,so if there are clear reasons cased closed.

[Morch]

5 minutes ago, nasanews said:

I disguise those who believe in conspiracy, I am logical human being, what happens have reasons ,so if there are clear reasons cased closed.

 

Well, they are "clear" to you, at least.

Try reading the links provided, though. May just make things even clearer.

 

 

 

[nasanews]

15 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Well, they are "clear" to you, at least.

Try reading the links provided, though. May just make things even clearer.

 

 

 

Nothing more clear than my mind in my heart, confident and optimist.

[anon4546543]

On 03/08/2017 at 9:37 AM, Rancid said:

More sanctions. Seem to recall that the embargo on Germany in the 30's was widely regarded as a contributing factor to WW2. In fact wasn't there also sanctions on Japan as well? Hmm.

 

Just as well we have nothing to learn from history or you might draw some unpleasant conclusions as to where all this is going...

I totally agree. Sanctions allow other countries to do business.

If sanctions impact as in Japan, war results.

 Sanctions mostly mean that poor people suffer.

 The thing is, if US exited Middle East, If muslims just got on to the business

of killing each other as they have done for a thousand years, 

the world would mostly be at peace

[Scott]

Off-topic posts removed.   The thread is about Iran.

[ilostmypassword]

And now Trump is in the process of gaming intelligence to justify pulling out of the agreement the next time certification is up for approval:

Trump Assigns White House Team to Target Iran Nuclear Deal, Sidelining State Department

 

After a contentious meeting with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson this week, President Donald Trump instructed a group of trusted White House staffers to make the potential case for withholding certification of Iran at the next 90-day review of the nuclear deal. The goal was to give Trump what he felt the State Department had failed to do: the option to declare that Tehran was not in compliance with the agreement.

“The president assigned White House staffers with the task of preparing for the possibility of decertification for the 90-day review period that ends in October — a task he had previously given to Secretary Tillerson and the State Department,” a source close to the White House told Foreign Policy.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/21/trump-assigns-white-house-team-to-target-iran-nuclear-deal-sidelining-state-department/

[Morch]

5 hours ago, ilostmypassword said:

And now Trump is in the process of gaming intelligence to justify pulling out of the agreement the next time certification is up for approval:

Trump Assigns White House Team to Target Iran Nuclear Deal, Sidelining State Department

 

After a contentious meeting with Secretary of State Rex Tillerson this week, President Donald Trump instructed a group of trusted White House staffers to make the potential case for withholding certification of Iran at the next 90-day review of the nuclear deal. The goal was to give Trump what he felt the State Department had failed to do: the option to declare that Tehran was not in compliance with the agreement.

“The president assigned White House staffers with the task of preparing for the possibility of decertification for the 90-day review period that ends in October — a task he had previously given to Secretary Tillerson and the State Department,” a source close to the White House told Foreign Policy.

http://foreignpolicy.com/2017/07/21/trump-assigns-white-house-team-to-target-iran-nuclear-deal-sidelining-state-department/

 

Essentially, there's nothing wrong with asking for another review, even one that's more aligned with a policy pushed and view upheld. Trouble begins when facts are ignored in favor of complying with the leadership's wishes. With regard to Trump's administration, this is indeed worrisome, especially seeing as Bannon is on the team mentioned.

 

Seems like the administration is divided along a rough line between those with some substantial real life experience in matters relating to security and international relations, and those who don't. The former tend to present a more cautious approach, whereas the latter are committed to ideological positions and rhetoric.