Fred Saberi

JCPOA 2:The nightmare of the EU and Iranian regime

Zarif meeting with European counterparts

In addition to the recent threats of the Islamic Republic against the United States and the Arab countries in order to frighten them and prevent them from a military strike against itself, the regime’s threats against the European countries in order to force them to circumvent the White House’s sanctions for the regime are also important.

The main factor behind the shameless extortionism of the Islamic state based in Tehran from the European community is the ambiguities embodied in the JCPOA, more commonly known as the Iran Nuclear Deal. These “ambiguities” in the text of the deal are several clauses that constitute holes or alleyways that allow the Islamist regime to conduct some dangerous but seemingly permissible moves.

In the text of the deal, under the chapter entitled “Iran’s Authorization to Continue Peaceful Activities,” there is a passage that states the regime has the right to enrich uranium up to 20 percent for scientific research and medical purposes. On this basis, the regime is constantly threatening Europe to enact its obligations to circumvent US sanctions, or it will use its scientific and medical authorization to enrich uranium up to 20 percent.

Since the regime is authorized to purchase and import this multi-purpose uranium, it will soon start to impute its inability to benefit from “scientific research” and “medical use” to the sanctions, and will start the 20 percent enrichment. It should be noted that uranium with a concentration of 20% has a high fission capability, and therefore will be able to increase the rate of enrichment in the next steps during a series of chain reactions.

When President Trump called the Iranian Nuclear Deal a “very, very bad” deal, he exactly meant such deadly concessions that the EU and the Obama administration made to the Iranian regime. John Kerry claims that if the Europeans and the United States had not given those privileges to the regime to coax it to sign the deal, the Iranian regime would only have been a few months away from producing atomic bombs.

Even if we accept John Kerry and the Western negotiating team’s claim, should not such running of the Islamic Republic towards nuclear weapons be enough to prove to the West the necessity of bombing the nuclear facilities of the regime with all its consequences? Of course, this could have had serious consequences, but no one could claim that the consequences were more disastrous than that of a nuclear blast in the Middle East.

The Western negotiating team consisted of representatives of countries that possessed advanced atomic equipment, and thus could see the risk of the apocalyptic regime’s going nuclear. Nevertheless, they, with a naive belief in their ability to curb the regime through diplomacy, postponed the destruction of the regime’s nuclear facilities and sites, thinking they could dissuade the scorpion from doing what is its nature, which is to sting.

Many regard the “profiteering” of Europeans as the cause of this neglect and indulgence towards the regime. That, of course, is true, and Europe was also pursuing its economic interests through the JCPOA. Were the “globalist greed” and a sense of excessive need for a “regional gendarme” to maintain trade stability in the Middle East the motive for this stupidity? Or the incentive to sell European turbines and advanced German reactors in the future? Whatever the motive, what can justify leaving loopholes for the apocalyptic regime to circumvent the nuclear deal and rush towards nuclearization?

It was due to these mistakes and shortcomings in the nuclear deal that today the Islamic Republic can make a chaos in the Middle East and the rest of the world with impunity. The regime knows very well that in the event of a re-negotiation with the United States and Europe over atomic issues, and after the elimination of the “ambiguities” of the original deal, it will be the great loser of the “game of death” with the West. However, it seems that it is not only Tehran that fears another round of negotiations. The European side is also reluctant to re-negotiate for some reason. And this should be magnified and studied with great care.

About the Author
Fred Saberi is a Swedish political analyst of Iranian origin interested in Middle East affairs.
Related Topics
Related Posts