Saturday, March 14, 2015

‘A Nuclear Agreement Is Impossible’ – Shariatmadari

Hossein Shariatmadari, the influential editor of Kayhan, arguably the voice of Iran’s hardliners, and himself an appointee of the country’s supreme leader, wrote an editorial in Saturday’s edition of the paper entitled, “A Nuclear Agreement Is Impossible.” Shariatmadari argues that reaching a nuclear agreement with the West that would safeguard Iran’s legitimate interests is absolutely “impossible” and will not happen.

The editorial was published on the eve of a sensitive meeting in Lausanne between Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif and Secretary of State John Kerry. They were to hammer out the details of an agreement before the 31 March deadline.

Shariatmadari has been regarded as an aide and confidant to Supreme Leader Ayatollah Khamenei. His views and analyses during his long tenure at Kayhan have usually approximated those held by the country’s security establishment, especially the IRGC Intelligence. The bold tone in his prediction of the failure of the nuclear talks could mean one of the two things:

1. Shariatmadari is as always voicing the views of the supreme leader and the hard right establishment, in which case he apparently knows that the supreme leader has rejected the proposed agreement by the West, and the talks in Lausanne will fail.

2. In this particular issue, Shariatmadari’s views differ from those held by the supreme leader, but he would still make such a bold statement on the eve of Lausanne talks to rally the hard right establishment behind his views in a last-ditch attempt to stop a nuclear agreement with the West.

Not good in either case. The first option would be the harbinger of growing and very dangerous tensions between Iran and the West, and internally between the hardliners and the moderate Rouhani administration. The second option would signify the growing rift and rupture within the country’s political establishment, at the point of openly undermining Khamenei’s position, with all the uncertainties it would entail.

Meanwhile, the Lausanne talks will begin in a few hours.

For Farsi speakers, here is the link to the Kayhan's editorial.


Anonymous said...

More and more us representatives and journalists as well as radio disscussions use descriptions for a possible nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic, that it will be a kind of "non- binding" one.

Do I correctly understand, that all deal or some its provisionsit may be unilaterally suspended or cancelled by the US side at any time in the future ??

This situation may bear the same similarities with a deal with North Korea in the 90s, where the agreement was never officially signed by the West side, and soon after that the West delayed or not implemented many promises in that deal....., where the NK, at the beginning or later to my best knowledge, halted development of nuclear projects, and among other events, demolished a cooling tower associated with those projects.


Anonymous said...

1) Iran will make an Agreement with 5 Powers not onlx with US

2) The Iran Agreement will be decided in Security council ands sanctions are lifted.

Anonymous said...

An opinion piece printed in the Washington Post

War with Iran is probably our best option

By Joshua Muravchik March 13

Joshua Muravchik is a fellow at the Foreign Policy Institute of Johns Hopkins University’s School of Advanced International Studies.


" What if force is the only way to block Iran from gaining nuclear weapons? That, in fact, is probably the reality. Ideology is the raison d’etre of Iran’s regime, legitimating its rule and inspiring its leaders and their supporters. In this sense, it is akin to communist, fascist and Nazi regimes that set out to transform the world. Iran aims to carry its Islamic revolution across the Middle East and beyond. A nuclear arsenal, even if it is only brandished, would vastly enhance Iran’s power to achieve that goal.

Such visionary regimes do not trade power for a mess of foreign goods. Materialism is not their priority: They often sacrifice prosperity to adhere to ideology. Of course, they need some wealth to underwrite their power, but only a limited amount. North Korea has remained dirt poor practicing its ideology of juche, or self-reliance, but it still found the resources to build nuclear weapons."
" Sanctions may have induced Iran to enter negotiations, but they have not persuaded it to abandon its quest for nuclear weapons. Nor would the stiffer sanctions that Netanyahu advocates bring a different result. Sanctions could succeed if they caused the regime to fall; the end of communism in Ukraine and Kazakhstan, and of apartheid in South Africa, led to the abandonment of nuclear weapons in those states. But since 2009, there have been few signs of rebellion in Tehran.

Otherwise, only military actions — by Israel against Iraq and Syria, and through the specter of U.S. force against Libya — have halted nuclear programs. Sanctions have never stopped a nuclear drive anywhere.

Does this mean that our only option is war? Yes..."

Anonymous said...

sanctions will not be lifted immediately after a deal goes into effect. they will be lifted one at a time over months or years

Anonymous said...

sanctions will not be lifted immediately after a deal goes into effect. they will be lifted one at a time over months or years

in this case no deal

Anonymous said...

I believe that Iran has merits of its history not to be judged by others, especially by those with short histories and too many ugly deeds in between.....

Iran as an descendant of Persia's honorable ancient and proud culture, has not an obligation to prove its credibility, but those should prove, who even cannot agree between themselves and who support a regime who hides 200 nuclear weapons and claims that killing of 2000 Palestinians is its right to retaliate for 3 deaths on its side.

The agreement with North Korea was not not implemented, because of a nuclear weapon, but because the Us doesn't want to legitimize the NK's system, and it is the same case with the Islamic Republic.
In the case of the IRI, they not only do not want to legitimize, but gradually or as soon as possible to dismantle it, followiong the wishes of israel, which emerged on at least dubious claims, since many its inhibitants and outside supporters do not recognize religious aspects of their 'identity', and even consider them as a myth or fantasy.


Anonymous said...

Anon at 10:04 AM

"they will be lifted one at a time over....years"
- Do you think that next presidents or even THIS, will be willing or capable to DO this (lift major sanctions) during his tenure ??


Anonymous said...

Iran's history is indeed long and long, long ago was glorious.

since becoming a conquered nation that was forced to convert to an Arab religion more than 1000 years ago, Iran's history has been filled with few great achievements.

the current regime is something of which to be ashamed. it is a reactionary and vile little dictatorship run by a small band of old hate-filled priests.

Iran deserves a better future and the citizens deserve a government that doesn't oppress and degrade them.

Anonymous said...

" Do you think that next presidents or even THIS, will be willing or capable to DO this (lift major sanctions) during his tenure ?? "


the sanctions will go away when Iran submits

to full inspections and an end to the nuclear weapons development program.

otherwise, there's no reason to lift the sanctions and good reason to increase them.

Anonymous said...

The Current Iran Regime is in any case more democratic als the US good friend SHAH

Anonymous said...

Anon at 9:51 PM

To whom Iran has to subdue itself, in a case where other side has no an internal integrity at this time ?
Has Iran to subdue itself to those foreign outsiders, who meddle by their lobbies in the us ??

The most probable outcome will be that Russia, China and other entity from the P5+1, will lift sanctions and guarantee to the world Iran's adherences to the NPT, in specified period of time.

A-F, Dissident from usa.

Anonymous said...

Anon at 9:49 PM

At any fight against a system, the first step is to crack or undermine its foundation and credibility.

It is obvious that the foundation of current Iran is the Islamic System, which recognizes presence and worship other religion on the Iran's teritory, as well as a travel of its citizens, on conditions that they are not paid by foreign entities to act against the Islamic System.


Anonymous said...

Anonymous at 9:49PM

"...Iran desrves a better future .....and a government that doesn't degrade them" (Iranian citizens).

I had an opportunity to live under an "oppressive" system and later to experience 'blessings' of the us system, where I was 3 times burglarized, 3 times terminated from my jobs; including volumtary one, because I had dared to express my critical views upon inquiry of others, during my brakes or after my working time. I had also numerous events where official agencies, pretending to serve complaints, exercised their "rights" to get rid of me.
It even came to a parody that after one of those aforementioned burglaries, the us police ostracized me in verbally and in their reports of accidemts.......

My conclusion is that, present system that is currently in Iran; if not obstructed by the us and their accomplices, would advance to the levels , which would serve Iranian domestic population and her technological achievments better, than those systems which serve human stupidity in priority than the common human wisdoms.
One can be happy without tattoos on the lower backs or buttocks, and without a 'freedom' to display them to others on the streets or public transportation, for instance .....

I think that the american society should not be in position to dictate a behaviour to others, becase they even err themselves in every major and important issues, examples could be an religion and marriage, where more than a half of those matters ends in changes by an average american, as well as that they are unable to fix their educational systems to the levels of grades in other nations.

In the future the same may and will happen, to their allegiances related to other matters (that they will choose to change),............or that it may be a 'freedom' of their choices.

A-F, Dissident from usa