Min Steinitz - If I were American, I would oppose the agreement / MFA: Deficiencies in the Iran nuclear deal

Min Steinitz - If I were American, I would oppose the agreement / MFA: Deficiencies in the Iran nuclear deal. HT IMRA.

#1. Minister Steinitz: "If I were American, I would oppose the agreement." (Communicated by the Prime Minister's Media Adviser)

Energy, National Infrastructures and Water Minister Dr. Yuval Steinitz, today (Tuesday, 4 August 2015), released the following statement in reply to recent remarks by US Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz regarding the nuclear agreement with Iran:

"If I were American, I would oppose the agreement.

I would oppose the agreement because it ensures from the outset Iran's becoming a nuclear power capable of producing dozens of atomic bombs per month, ten years from today.

I would oppose the agreement because it is likely to lead to a nuclear arms race between Iran and the Sunni Arab states – in complete contravention of the avowed policy of the US.

I would oppose the agreement because even in the short term, the inspections are not immediate and invasive, as was promised at the start.

I would oppose the agreement because it harms the national security of the United States, Israel and every Western country."

Minister Steinitz met with US Energy Secretary Moniz approximately two months ago in Washington for talks on the Iranian nuclear issue and other energy matters as well.

#2. MFA: Deficiencies in the Iran nuclear deal Deficiencies in the Iran nuclear deal 03 Aug 2015.

The agreement is supposed to limit the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction and should include an enforcement mechanism. However, no such mechanism exists. Instead, conflicts can only be resolved by mutually agreed consensus.

1. Inspections of suspicious sites

There are strong concerns regarding the access request mechanism:

First of all, permission to visit suspicious sites could take far longer to arrange than 24 days. The 24-day countdown starts only after the IAEA turns to Iran with its suspicions concerning a particular site (thereby revealing to the Iranians the intelligence-based information the IAEA possesses). Iran subsequently must supply an answer, but no time limit is specified for the Iranian response. It is entirely possible that a long time will pass, possibly even months, without an Iranian reply. During that time, the IAEA cannot request to visit the site (which would start the 24-day countdown).

It is important to note that Iran will be able to cover up any signs of prohibited activity within the 24-day period, particularly if this activity does not involve fissile material (for example, calculations on the output of a nuclear explosion or experiments using metal with a radioactive signature that is not uranium).

Another important point to stress is that if Iran decides not to permit a visit to the site even after the 24-day countdown no automatic enforcement is applied. Instead, the matter is passed on to the Joint Commission, which will have another 65 days to make a decision. It is also possible that the commission's discussion will end without imposing any enforcement measures, allowing Iran to refuse entry to the inspectors, again without any punishment or enforcement actions.

Moreover, Iran has already signaled its unwillingness to allow inspections of an entire category of sites: In Iran’s letter to the President of the Security Council of July 20th it declares "such (military) facilities will not be subject to inspection"

2. The agreement does not include an enforcement mechanism

The agreement, which has a technical character, is supposed to limit the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction. To achieve that goal, it should include an enforcement mechanism, so that Iran’s violations of the agreement (or its overly expansive interpretations of gray areas) would be dealt with by enforcement actions. However, no such mechanism exists. The so-called “snap back option” can only handle major violations. All other Iranian violations that fall short of "significant non-performance” cannot be addressed through the agreement’s mechanisms. This means that the agreement is based on an all or nothing approach that is not capable of dealing with the wide range of problematic Iranian behaviors that will probably arise.

3. The conflict resolution mechanism relies on reaching consensus

Instead of an enforcement mechanism, the agreement includes a conflict resolution mechanism. This mechanism is designed to only resolve conflicts that can be mutually agreed-upon by consensus. In the absence of such a consensus, this mechanism would be effectively paralyzed. As this agreement concerns major conflicting interests between the sides, the chances of arriving at a good-faith consensus are slender.

4. Issues with “snap back” sanctions

In theory, any of the P5 powers can reinstate the sanctions through the UN Security Council and no veto is permitted. However, according to the agreement and repetitive statements by Iran, should the “snap back option” be utilized, Iran will withdraw from the agreement. Hence, any of the five states that believes that the snap back option should be deployed can only do so if it is willing to bear the consequences: the dissolution of the agreement. This creates a strong deterrent effect against activating "snap back" of the sanctions.

5. The agreement is unmanageable

Although the published nuclear agreement is long and contains many details, in many topics the language used in the agreement is vague, lacking detail or is not explicit enough to prevent widely varied interpretations of their contents. Given its history in the nuclear field, Iran will probably exploit these unclear or unequivocal formulations to its benefit.

6. The procurement channel for nuclear-related products is not tight, and enforcement ability is incomplete:

Security Council resolution 2231 of July 20th established a channel for monitoring the acquisition of products or raw materials used for nuclear-related activities. The monitoring is based on declarations by the exporting state and Joint Commission supervision. However, the mechanism leaves too much up to the judgment of the exporting state, as to whether the products or materials must be declared, and to the way their use will be monitored. It is very likely that Iran will exploit this gap to its own advantage.

Also, if a third party discovers violations in this area (such as a product or service that should have been declared but was sold not through the procurement channel), there is no effective recourse that allows sufficient enforcement of the matter.

7. Removal of the arms embargo and restrictions regarding ballistic missiles:

The agreement includes the removal of the embargo on Iranian armaments and restrictions regarding its ballistic missiles after five and eight years respectively. However, the agreement purports to be limited to the nuclear issue (this is one of the justifications for not including other destabilizing Iranian behaviors, such as its support of terrorism).

Furthermore, during the period while the embargo is still in place, there will be no effective enforcement mechanisms: in the framework of canceling previous Security Council resolutions, the Sanctions Committee and the Panel of Experts that were in charge of enforcing the embargo on Iran were also canceled. Allegedly, the embargo’s implementation will be monitored by some mechanism in the Security Council Secretariat; however, this mechanism has not yet been formulated, it will probably not be comprised of experts but rather political figures, and the result will be, again, lack of effective enforcement in the event that violations are discovered.

It is important to note that Iran and the P5+1 agreed ahead of time that a violation of the embargo would not constitute a violation of the nuclear agreement, but only(!) of Security Council resolution 2231; this according to the Iranian negotiator, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi. Iran has already announced that it will not honor these restrictions because they are, according to Iran, "illegal" – just as in the past it didn’t honor the Security Council resolutions that are canceled due to the agreement. Hezbollah’s leader, Hassan Nasrallah, who continues to receive weapons (including advanced missiles) from Iran, conveyed a similar message.

8. The possible military dimensions (PMD) of Iran’s nuclear program are not a condition of the agreement:

It seems that the PMD issue (IAEA examination of Iran’s past military nuclear program) was not included as a condition of the agreement’s implementation or for the removal of sanctions. This makes it difficult to determine the extent of Iran’s military nuclear program in the past. Furthermore, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, Ali Akbar Salehi, said in this context that Iran has understandings with IAEA and that the conclusions of the reports that will be submitted by the IAEA are known to Iran in advance. This issue is important not only to understand what Iran did in the past and what the possible penalization is for this action, but also in order to understand what should be done in the future to prevent Iran from progressing with its military program under the auspices of a legitimate civilian program according to the agreement.

9. Legal aspects:

It should be noted that only parts of the agreement were drafted under Chapter VII, Article 41of the UN Charter (which allows non-military sanctions in the event of a violation). This weakens the legal force of the agreement.

Video - Is Iran Less Dangerous to the World Thanks to Iran Deal?

Israeli PM Netanyahu: Iran deal will bring war, ‘nightmare’ atomic arms race.

Israeli PM Netanyahu: Iran deal will bring war, ‘nightmare’ atomic arms race. (TOI).

The world powers’ nuclear deal with Iran will lead to war and a “nightmare” regional nuclear arms race, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu warned in an online address to American and Canadian Jews on Tuesday evening.

Netanyahu, who has been seeking to sway US lawmakers to thwart the agreement, accused the deal’s supporters in the Obama administration of spreading “disinformation about the deal and about Israel’s position” in its bid to rally support.

He pointed out a series of “fatal flaws” in the deal, and asserted that it “doesn’t block Iran’s path to bomb,” but rather “paves” its path to the bomb.

The agreement, a legacy foreign policy project of US President Barack Obama, gives Iran “two paths to the bomb,” enabling Tehran to obtain a weapon either by keeping the deal and waiting for it to elapse, or by violating it, Netanyahu warned.

The Conference of Presidents and Jewish Federations in the US and Canada had encouraged viewers of Netanyahu’s address to join the call through computers and cellphones as well as through group viewings at Jewish institutions.

During his brief address Tuesday, the prime minister responded to several questions that had been sent in in advance.

One of the questions related to Israel’s alternative to the nuclear deal – the administration has insisted that there is no viable alternative to the deal, and that opponents had no solution to offer other than war.

“Increase the sanctions, increase the pressure,” Netanyahu said, in presenting his alternative to the deal, asserting that Iran would not back away from the negotiating table, even if subjected to harsher sanctions, and would abide more stringent curbs on its nuclear program.

He argued that the opposition to the deal across the Israeli political spectrum was indicative of the “dangerous” nature of the agreement.

“A huge majority of Israelis” oppose it, he said, claiming that since it is not a partisan issue in Israel, it shouldn’t be a partisan issue in the US either. “Rise above partisan politics,” he urged. “Judge [the deal] on substance, and on substance alone.”

“Oppose this dangerous deal,” he implored.

Netanyahu accused supporters of the deal of trying to “stifle debate” and said they have been misrepresenting the agreement in order to win support.

“This deal will bring war,” he warned. “Iran can keep the deal or Iran can cheat on the deal,” Either way, it will have the bomb, Netanyahu said, before adding, “hundreds of bombs.”

Furthermore, he said, addressing the audience, Iran has been building intercontinental ballistic missiles in order “to hit you,” not Israel.

He also predicted a nuclear arms race in the Middle East — “the most volatile part of the planet” — in the wake of the deal.

“That’s a real nightmare,” Netanyahu added.

“Here’s the bottom line,” he said. “Oppose this bad deal.” Read the full story here.

Arabs tell Kerry: ”We want Iranian cooperation, not meddling,”

Arabs tell Kerry: ”We want Iranian cooperation, not meddling,” (IMRA).

QUOTE:”Iran’s nuclear deal should bring stability and ‘good neighborliness’ rather than interference, Gulf Arab states told US Secretary of State Kerry”

DOHA — Iran's nuclear deal should bring stability and “good neighborliness” rather than interference, Gulf Arab states told US Secretary of State John Kerry on Monday[3 Aug] as they began talks on the merits of its historic accord with world powers.

Qatari Foreign Minister Khalid Al-Attiyah, welcoming US Secretary of State John Kerry to Qatar for the talks with the six countries of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC), said the alliance wanted to spare the region “from any dangers and threats from nuclear weapons”.

This should be done by authorizing the use of nuclear technology for peaceful purposes in line with international rules, he said, speaking for the GCC as host of the meeting.

“We look forward with hope to the nuclear agreement ... leading to the preservation of security and stability in the region, and we emphasize the importance of cooperation with Iran based on principles of good neighborliness, non-interference in internal affairs and solving disputes peacefully.”

Al-Attiyah spoke of the urgency of resolving the crises in Syria, Yemen and Iraq, but also complained that “the Middle East is suffering from the failures of the peace process due to the Israeli occupation” of Palestinian land. He accused Israel of “intransigence” in dealing with the Palestinians and said it must end its “illegal blockade of Gaza.”

“We call on the United States of America to exert more efforts to go back to the peace process,” he said before journalists were ushered out of the room.

Kerry, who did not speak while reporters were present, is not traveling to Israel on this trip and US leverage with the current Israeli government is limited, given Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's vehement and vocal opposition to the Iran deal.

US officials rejected suggestions that Kerry was not visiting Israel this week because the administration has given up hope on convincing Netanyahu of the merits of the agreement. Kerry's main goal, however, is to follow up on a May meeting that President Barack Obama hosted for Arab leaders at Camp David. At that meeting, Obama promised Bahrain, Kuwait, Oman, Qatar, Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates enhanced security cooperation and expedited defense sales to guard against a potential Iranian threat.

Kerry has acknowledged concerns about Iran's behavior in the Middle East but says it would be easier to deal with if Iran does not develop a nuclear weapon. He said the agreement struck by world powers with Iran in Vienna last month is the best way to do that.

“Iran is engaged in destabilizing activities in the region — and that is why it is so important to ensure that Iran's nuclear program remains wholly peaceful,” he said on Sunday in Egypt before flying to Qatar. “There can be absolutely no question that the Vienna plan, if implemented, will make Egypt and all the countries of this region safer than they otherwise would be.”

Kerry's visit to Qatar follows one last week by Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who also stopped in Kuwait and Iraq to present Tehran's side of the nuclear deal. — Agencies. Hmmm.......Seems all of Obama & Kerry's 'friends' agree Israel is the problem.

Video - The Iran Nuclear Deal - by Prager University

The Iran Nuclear Deal

As Congress debates whether to approve or oppose the nuclear agreement reached with Iran, we've produced this crucially important video with Dennis Prager--a video that answers the deal's biggest questions:Is the agreement a good or bad deal? Would it make it harder or easier for Iran to develop nuclear weapons? Would it make Iran and its terror proxies stronger or weaker? Should the U.S. Congress support or defeat the deal? Watch the video to understand the deal in 5 minutes.Share it so that others can understand.

Posted by Prager University on Monday, August 3, 2015

'Kill the Bad Deal' - 218 lawmakers sign on to resolution expressing 'firm disapproval' of deal

'Kill the Bad Deal' - 218 lawmakers sign on to resolution expressing 'firm disapproval' of deal. (WB).

At least 218 Republican lawmakers have signed on to support a resolution expressing “firm disapproval” of the nuclear deal, which would provide Iran with billions of dollars in sanctions relief while enabling it to continue work on ballistic missiles and other nuclear research.

The measure, which is being led by Rep. Peter Roskam (R., Ill) and was first reported by the Washington Free Beacon, comes as Congress takes 60 days to review the deal before voting on it.

Many lawmakers, including a growing number of Democrats, have come out against the deal, citing concerns it does not do enough to limit Iran’s nuclear program.

Critics remain most concerned about portions of the deal that will ban U.S. inspectors from Iran’s nuclear sites and remove restrictions on the Islamic Republic’s ballistic missile program.

In the weeks since the deal was signed, critics have warned that it will only embolden Tehran’s intransigence, including its illicit nuclear relationship with North Korea. Hmmmm.....'Yes WE CAN'. Read the full story here.

Video - conference at the National Press Club in Washington on the Iran Nuclear Deal.

Republican Jewish Coalition Demands Pres Hussein Obama Stop Demonizing Jews.

Republican Jewish Coalition Demands Pres Hussein Obama Stop Demonizing Jews. (TJP).By: Lori Lowenthal Marcus.

Last week President Obama held a conference call with interested Americans, seeking to directly sell them on the nuclear deal the U.S. and its P5+1 partners made with Iran.

Many Jews who listened on the call were taken aback by what they heard as coded anti-Semitic language being used by the President to attack those who are critical of the deal.

On Friday, the Republican Jewish Coalition issued a statement demanding that Obama stop demonizing the critics of the Iran deal with code words for Jews.

Matt Brooks, the executive director of the RJC, quoted the President’s comment, that the “lobbying taking place on the other side is fierce, well-financed and relentless.”

Brooks responded, “Some of us have been around long enough to remember how Jewish groups – including Jewish Republicans – came down hard on the first President Bush for similar remarks.

“Apparently, the President’s claim that he ‘welcomes a robust debate’ was just rhetoric – like his administration’s repeated pledges to make Iran submit to ‘anytime, anywhere’ inspections.

“Jewish leaders need to hold President Obama to the same standards they held the first President Bush. And President Obama should stick to the facts and stop demonizing Americans who are rightly skeptical of his dubious deal with the Tehran regime.”

As at least one observer noticed, in addition to using code words like “lobby” and “well-financed,” President Obama also repeated the idea that “the same people who are opposing the Iran deal got us into the Iraq war.” 

The “neocons” are frequently blamed for pulling the U.S. into the Iraq war, and “neocons” is frequently a code word for Jews. Hmmm......The upright (honorable, intrinsically good) man out of the good treasure [stored] in his heart produces what is upright (honorable and intrinsically good), and the evil man out of the evil storehouse brings forth that which is depraved (wicked and intrinsically evil); for out of the abundance (overflow) of the heart his mouth speaks. - Luke 6:45

U.S. Agrees to Speed up Arms Sales to Gulf States, Says Kerry

U.S. Agrees to Speed up Arms Sales to Israel's enemies Gulf States, Says Kerry.(Naharnet).

Washington has agreed to speed up arms sales to Gulf countries, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry said Monday, following talks in Doha on their concerns over the Iran nuclear deal.

His Qatari counterpart, Khalid bin Mohammad Al-Attiyah, told a joint press conference with Kerry that the nuclear deal was "the best option among other options".

Kerry said the United States had "agreed to expedite certain arms sales that are needed and that have taken too long in the past".

Following talks with foreign ministers of the six-nation Gulf Cooperation Council, Kerry said that Washington and the region's Arab states would also step up efforts to share intelligence and increase the number of joint military exercises.

The secretary of state was in the Qatari capital for a day-long set of meetings with GCC representatives in a bid to calm their fears over the nuclear accord with Iran.

Gulf countries have expressed concerns that the July 14 deal between Iran and world powers would allow greater interference in the region by the Islamic republic.

"We talked about the possibility, not the possibility, the reality of increasing the number of exercises that we are conducting together," Kerry said.

"These are a few examples and ways in which we believe the security of the region can be strengthened and cooperation will be enhanced."

Attiyah, for his part, said there was support for the nuclear deal among countries in the Gulf.

"This was the best option among other options to come up with a solution to the nuclear weapons of Iran through dialogue," the Qatari minister said, speaking in Arabic.

Egypt sponsoring together with Arab & Muslim states IAEA resolution to monitor Israel's nuclear capability.

Kerry Yesterday in Egypt.

Deputy Foreign Min. Araqchi: In nuke talks Kerry was often on our side, trying to find formula to meet our demands. (Briefing for govt, TV).

— Amir Taheri (@AmirTaheri4) August 3, 2015

Deputy Foreign Min. Araqchi: 6 Powers wanted us to stop arming Hezbollah; we refused. Kerry backed out stance. ( Briefing govt. TV).

— Amir Taheri (@AmirTaheri4) August 3, 2015

Egypt sponsoring together with Arab & Muslim states IAEA resolution to monitor Israel's nuclear capability.(Haaretz) HT: IsraelMatzav.

Haaretz reported on Monday the Israeli foreign ministry has launched a diplomatic campaign two weeks ago to block a resolution to put Israeli nuclear facilities under international supervision.

The newspaper said Israel was trying to thwart a resolution, which is being pushed by Arab and Muslim states that will come up for a vote at the International Atomic Energy Agency’s General Conference in mid-September.

A senior foreign ministry official told Haaretz he feared the recent nuclear deal between Iran and the six powers will make it hard for Israel to defeat the resolution.

The resolution which is titled “Israeli nuclear capabilities” and has been repeatedly proposed by Egypt in past years.

It demands that Israeli open its reported nuclear facilities to IAEA inspection and calls for an international conference on making the Middle East a nuclear-weapons-free zone.

Egypt and Iran proposed a similar resolution a few month ago at the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty review conference, but the United States, Britain and Canada blocked it.

Israel has succeeded in mustering a majority against Egypt’s IAEA resolution for the last three years.

But this time just before the beginning of public holidays in European countries, the Israeli foreign ministry has sent cables to all Israeli embassies and consulates instructing them to urge their host governments to oppose the Egyptian-led resolution.

The cable claims the resolution is fundamentally biased and mistaken and is aimed at diverting global attention from the real dangers of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East. Hmmm....As i said before Hussein's 'target' has always been Israel's nuclear capabilities.

'Moderate' Rouhani: 'My admin has boosted Iran's military capabilities by as much as 80 Percent'

Rouhani: 'My admin has boosted Iran's military capabilities as much as 80 % of the military power preceding my administration.' (Taz).

Iranian president said that the country reached its three goals in nuclear deal.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has just started a live address on the national TV (IRIB) on August 2 about the recent deal on the country's nuclear program as well as his administration's economic plans.

"Iran's main goals in nuclear talks were protecting nuclear rights, excluding from the resolution of Chapter VII of the United Nations as well as elimination of sanctions".

Rouhani said that while countries such as Iraq and Japan have suffered much loss in trying to come out of Chapter 7 of the UN Charter, Iran's achievement in winning UN approval of its peacefulness through diplomacy and preventing any great loss is "unique", he said.

He added what has been gained through the nuclear deal is far greater than what was expected two years ago when he set out for the nuclear talks.

"Iraq even underwent a change of regime after it was brought under Chapter 7 of the UN Charter and Japan had to toil for many years to neutralize its case. But Iran insured its rights through legal action," the president noted.

"The mechanisms of nuclear deal have been devised to make sure Iran will not be the loser in the deal, he stated. He called the agreement a win-win deal".

"Global concerns that Iran has been aiming to make a nuclear bomb and that the deal has postponed Iran's developing of a nuclear bomb for one year are fantasy", he said, adding Iran has not been seeking a nuclear bomb in the first place.

In reaction to domestic concerns about how reliable the 5+1 group would be, he said Iran has tested the group's reliability during the past two years, adding he expected the group to remain faithful to the deal in the next 10 years envisioned for the implementation of the the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

Iran and P5+1 (the US, UK, France, Russia, China and Germany).achieved the nuclear deal on July 14.

Through the deal, world powers have tried to intensify International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) monitoring over Iran's nuclear activities, while Iran has pursued the removal of sanctions on its economy.

In relation to concerns that the nuclear deal will weaken Iran's military power, Rouhani said his administration has boosted Iran's military capabilities as much as 80 percent of the military power-up achieved during the 10 years preceding his administration.

Iranian president said that the deal will not mitigate Iran's missile power either, because it specifically bans Iran from any missiles capable of carrying nuclear warheads, while Iran is not going to make such missiles, therefore the restriction will be of no practical effect, he said. Hmmm......'what has been gained through the nuclear deal is far greater than what was expected two years ago when he set out for the nuclear talks.' Yup Hussein Obama and Kerry gave them everything on a silver platter.

Video - Khamenei's Advisor Ali Akbar Velayati: Inspectors Will Not Be Allowed into Iranian Military Sites.

Obama's 'Pen pall' Khamenei publishes book on how to outwit US and destroy Israel.

Obama's 'Pen pall' Khamenei publishes book on how to outwit US and destroy Israel. (NYP) HT: CarlInJerusalem.

Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has published a new book called “Palestine,” a 416-page screed against the Jewish state. A blurb on the back cover credits Khamenei as “The flagbearer of Jihad to liberate Jerusalem.”

A friend sent me a copy from Iran, the only place the book is currently available, though an Arabic translation is promised soon.

    Obama administration officials likely hope that no American even hears about it.

Khamenei makes his position clear from the start: Israel has no right to exist as a state.

He uses three words. One is “nabudi” which means “annihilation.” The other is “imha” which means “fading out,” and, finally, there is “zaval” meaning “effacement.”

Khamenei claims that his strategy for the destruction of Israel is not based on anti-Semitism, which he describes as a European phenomenon. His position is instead based on “well-established Islamic principles.”

One such principle is that a land that falls under Muslim rule, even briefly, can never again be ceded to non-Muslims. What matters in Islam is ownership of a land’s government, even if the majority of inhabitants are non-Muslims.

However, according to Khamenei, Israel, which he labels as “adou” and “doshman,” meaning “enemy” and “foe,” is a special case for three reasons.

The first is that it is a loyal “ally of the American Great Satan” and a key element in its “evil scheme” to dominate “the heartland of the Ummah.”

The second reason is that Israel has waged war on Muslims on a number of occasions, thus becoming “a hostile infidel,” or “kaffir al-harbi.”

Finally, Israel is a special case because it occupies Jerusalem, which Khamenei describes as “Islam’s third Holy City.” Hmmm.....I wonder if Hussein Obama and Kerry got a signed copy? Read the full story here. More here.

Obama's BFF Iran Warns against US Senate's Access to Tehran-IAEA Agreement.

Obama's BFF Iran Warns against US Senate's Access to Tehran-IAEA Agreement. (Fars).

Iran's Envoy to the International Atomic Energy Agency Reza Najafi objected to the US Senate's demand for being briefed about the contents of the recently signed roadmap of cooperation between Tehran and the IAEA, warning the UN nuclear watchdog to avoid disclosing its secret agreements with Tehran.

"The agreements signed between a member country and the IAEA are definitely secret and cannot be presented to any other country at all," Najafi said in an interview with the Iranian students news agency on Saturday.

Referring to the discussions at the US Congress during which the US officials elaborated on the nuclear agreement between Iran and the Group 5+1 (the US, Russia, China, Britain and France plus Germany), he said, "The discussions revealed that the secret texts between Iran and the Agency have not even been provided to the US administration."

"For the very same reason, they cannot be presented to the Senate members either," Najafi added.

Elsewhere in an interview with another Iranian news agency, the envoy said Tehran has already warned the IAEA chief against the repercussions of a disclosure of its agreement with the UN nuclear watchdog agency.

"Iran has clarified it to Amano that the text of its understanding with the IAEA cannot be presented to the Senate," Najafi reiterated.

He further warned that "the Agency knows what it means to disclose a secret document".

The Iranian envoy also cautioned Amano that he is duty bound now to accept possible invitations of other countries' legislatures after he accepted last night to attend a US Senate meeting.

Head of the IAEA Yukiya Amano and Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran Ali Akbar Salehi signed a roadmap of cooperation in Vienna on July 14.

The roadmap contains secret arrangements stated in one or two documents entailing on the methods to be used by the two sides in their cooperation.

Senior Iranian nuclear officials have said that all IAEA member stated have such secret agreements and the UN nuclear watchdog is duty bound to keep them secret to any third party individual or state.

After the roadmap was signed, Salehi announced that the new agreement would fully settle all unresolved issues pertaining to Tehran's nuclear activities in the past.

"All past issues will be resolved completely after Iran and the Agency adopt some measures," Salehi told reporters after signing an agreement called the Iran-IAEA Cooperation 'Roadmap'.

He said that all agreements, including the measures decided for Parchin military site, will be implemented with full respect to Iran's redlines.

Iran had earlier announced that inspection of the country's military sites are one of its redlines.

"I hope that a new chapter in relations and cooperation between Iran and the IAEA will start after the settlement of the past issues," Salehi added.

Salehi made the remarks in Vienna just a short time after diplomats acknowledged a sum-up agreement had been made between world powers and Iran.

In relevant remarks late July, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister and senior negotiator Seyed Abbas Araqchi said that Tehran and the IAEA have compiled a new roadmap to settle the issues related to Parchin military site in Iran.

"The issues related to the past which are wrongly described by the IAEA as Possible Military Dimensions (PMD) have been discussed between Iran and the IAEA and God willing, they will be resolved based on the new roadmap signed by Mr. Amano and Salehi (the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran) and the arrangements made," Araqchi said.

"The road is in the same direction of the past agreements with a new roadmap and some related annexes which are Iran-IAEA documents and that's why they have not been released as no other country would release the documents that it has with the Agency," said Araqchi. Hmmmm......The more i read about this 'deal' the more the words 'high crimes and misdemeanors' come to my mind.

TEHRAN- Imam Fund plans to contribute $10 million to support President Obama's campaign to get nuke "deal" with Iran approved by Congress.

— Amir Taheri (@AmirTaheri4) July 31, 2015

French Pres. Hollande's senior adviser: ' if Congress rejects Iran deal, a better deal could be achieved'.

French Pres. Hollande's senior adviser: ' if Congress rejects Iran deal, a better deal could be achieved'. (Jpost).

The lawmakers, Democrat Loretta Sanchez and Republican Mike Turner, both members of the House Armed Services Committee, met with the French official in Paris earlier this month to discuss the Iran deal.

According to both lawmakers Audibert expressed support for the deal overall, "but also directly disputed Kerry’s claim that a Congressional rejection of the Iran deal would result in the worst of all worlds, the collapse of sanctions and Iran racing to the bomb without restrictions."

“He basically said, if Congress votes this down, there will be some saber-rattling and some chaos for a year or two, but in the end nothing will change and Iran will come back to the table to negotiate again and that would be to our advantage,” Sanchez told Josh Rogin of Bloomberg View.

“He thought if the Congress voted it down, that we could get a better deal,” Sanchez added.

Bloomberg's Rogin wrote in his report that a spokesman for the French embassy in Washington issued a statement saying it "formally denies the content of the remarks."

According to the report, Audibert also disagreed with Kerry's assertion that if the Congress doesn't lift US sanctions against Iran, the international sanctions regime would collapse and American competitors would rush into Iran to do business.

Audibert reportedly told Sanchez and Turner that if US sanctions were kept in place, it would effectively prevent the West from doing extensive business in Iran.

“I asked him specifically what the Europeans would do, and his comment was that the way the US sanctions are set in, he didn’t see an entity or a country going against them, that the risk was too high,” Sanchez said.

According to the report, Audibert also expressed to Sanchez and Turner some misgivings about the deal that was reached with Iran, including his belief that the deal should have been negotiated to last forever, not start to expire in as few as 10 years. 

He also told the lawmakers that "he didn’t understand why Iran needed more than 5,000 centrifuges for a peaceful nuclear program." In addition, the French official reportedly "expressed concerns about the robustness of the inspections and verification regime under the deal, according to the lawmakers." Hmmm.....It's becoming pretty obvious that Kerry the man with most personal 'connections' to Iran was the man giving in to Iran. Read the full story here.

Benjamin Netanyahu on Iran Deal: ‘We Aren’t Partners at the Table, We Are a Meal on the Menu’

Benjamin Netanyahu on Iran Deal: ‘We Aren’t Partners at the Table, We Are a Meal on the Menu’. (Jewishpress).

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu learned that U.S. Secretary of State will be making a trip to the Middle East to sell the Iran deal, but is skipping Israel.

Kerry will be visiting Egypt and Qatar and other Gulf State representatives, but won’t stop in the Jewish State, which until recently was considered America’s closest ally in the Middle East.

The Prime Minister’s response to the snub was, “Really, Kerry has no reason to come here.”

Expanding upon that response, Netanyahu said of the Iran deal, “This deal has nothing to do with us. We are not influenced by this deal at all. We aren’t partners at the table, we are a meal on the menu.”

These comments were made to reporters on Tuesday, July 28, during a return flight to Israel from Cyprus, as reported by Israel Hayom.

It isn’t only America’s erstwhile BFF Israel that is expressing dismay at the nuclear deal concluded by the U.S., along with its other P5+1 partners, and Iran. Appearing before the House Foreign Relations Committee on Tuesday, Kerry and other deal cheerleaders were grilled on the likelihood of Iran honoring the commitments under the deal.

“Iran has cheated on every agreement they’ve signed,” Rep. Ed Royce (R), chairman of the committee said. Royc continued, asking whether Iran “has earned the right to be trusted.”

Kerry responded that “nothing in this deal is built on trust. Nothing.” Hmmm..........'Trust must be earned'.

      Three Things To Know

Pres Hussein Obama May not accept rejection of Iran deal by U.S. Congress

  ---

Best Man at John Kerry's daughter's 2009 wedding? Iran Foreign Minister/nuke negotiator Javad Zarif’s son

---

Kerry believes that if U.S. Congress scraps the Nuclear deal Iran's Nuclear Fatwa no longer valid

Iran Nuclear Deal: Who are the Winners and Losers in this 'Deal'?

Iran Nuclear Deal: Who are the Winners and Losers in this 'Deal'? (Aawsat).By Amir Taheri.

We are still a long way before the “deal” on Iran’s nuclear program becomes reality, if ever.

However, even if it doesn’t, the process has already produced potential winners and losers.

The initial deal, known as Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), has no legal authority because no one has signed it. Nevertheless, the resolution passed by the United Nations Security Council last week, the seventh on the subject, might be regarded as providing the JCPOA with a measure of legality. As a sponsor of the resolution, the US voted for it and is thus committed to it. Iran, not a member of the Security Council, did not have to vote and has not accepted it yet.

Accepting the new resolution won’t be easy because it is based on six previous resolutions Iran has rejected.

Last Saturday, Iran’s Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif hinted that the Islamic Republic may not be able to accept the new resolution, in which case a thick fog would be cast over the whole issue.

“The text of JCPOA makes it clear that its content is not identical with the contents of [UN Security Council] Resolution 2231,” Zarif said. “By mixing the two, [US Secretary of State] John Kerry is fomenting confusion.”

For Iran to accept the new resolution, thus giving the JCPOA legal basis, the text must first be approved by the Council of Ministers.

It is then submitted to the High Council of National Defense.

If approved there, the text goes to the Islamic Majlis. If approved by the Majlis, it goes to the Council of the Custodians of the Constitution.

Finally, the text will be submitted to “Supreme Guide” Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who is not obliged to specifically endorse it and could cancel it at any time with a State Order (Hukm Al-Hokumi).

The only document signed by Iran in Vienna is what Yukiya Amano, the director of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), calls a “roadmap” to address the IAEA’s concerns about the military dimensions of the Iranian program with a view to issuing a report. (The text remains secret!)

But even that signature means little.

In the past 12 years, Iran has signed such documents on three occasions, each time reneging on them.

In any case, a “roadmap” does not tell one where to go, at what speed, and by which means of transportation—or whether to start a journey in the first place. A “roadmap” does not deprive you of circumventing some points or even making U-turns. Now read who are the Winners and loosers here.

Khamenei Advisor Velayati: Iran regards new UN resolution as "null and void". (Thus nuke "deal" won't get legal base as Iran signed nothing)

— Amir Taheri (@AmirTaheri4) July 30, 2015

Video exchange between SenTomCotton and Kerry explaining Iran's war against Americans

From @littlebytes's Patty Garza: 'This is truly startling....listen to the answers when the question is "Did you read the text of this agreement?" -- and then listen to the rest of the mess, it is absolutely mind boggling, and we thank Senator Tom Cotton for his questioning, it is EXCELLENT at exposing this mess for what it is.'

Video - Why is Obama's BFF Iran so happy about the nuclear deal?

Iran's Nuclear Spokesman: 1Million SWUs Enrichment Capacity needed & Available.

Iran's Nuclear Spokesman: 1mln SWUs Enrichment Capacity needed & Available. (Fars).

Spokesman of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Behrouz Kamalvandi underlined that the recently struck deal would not prevent the country from producing 1,000,000 SWUs (Separative Work Units) of enriched uranium in the long run.

Speaking to Iran's state radio on Wednesday, Kamalvandi referred to Supreme Leader of the Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei's rejection of the world powers' demand from Iran to suffice to a 10,000 SWU enrichment capacity as well as his emphasis on Iran's definite need to 190,000 SWUs enrichment power, and said a precise interpretation of the leader's statements shows that he meant a 190,000-SWU enrichment capacity is needed only for the Bushehr nuclear power plant irrespective to the country's other needs.

"The prospects considered by the Supreme Leader includes 1,000,000 SWUs annually which can of course be materialized in the long run and therefore, we don’t think of just 190,000 SWUs," he added, reminding that Iran plans to build many more power plants and would, hence, need a million SWUs to produce nuclear fuel for them in future.

In relevant remarks in April, Kamalvandi said that "the Islamic Republic of Iran plans to produce at least 190,000 SWUs (Separative Work Units) of nuclear fuel at the industrial scale, while we also think about 1,000,000 SWUs, which will be needed to fuel 5 power plants like Bushehr (nuclear power plant)".

"This is the reason why we have inked an agreement with the Russians to construct two nuclear power plants for the generation of electricity while the Chinese will also enter this arena soon," he added.