However, rather than denouncing the agreement outright, they indicated that they would follow Khamenei’s advice and examine its 159 pages in detail to see if it breached “red lines” laid down by the supreme leader in a statement in June. In Lebanon, Iran’s client Hizbollah continues to play a radicalising role inside the country and increasingly outside it as well. Moreover, it would in any event do nothing to disturb existing arrangements.
The meeting came after Saudi diplomats privately expressed grave misgivings that the nuclear agreement may legitimize their arch-foe Iran. That leverage is now gone. Iran knows this better than anyone.
Saudi Arabia is already signaling that it will act to counter any such Iranian action, reports The Christian Science Monitor, focusing particularly on Yemen and Syria. One month later, Jordan signed a $10 billion nuclear power plant agreement with Russian Federation.
Reported by military officials and observers, once the Saudi-led coalition makes headway in Yemen, Riyadh and its Sunni allies will shift their focus to Syria, where Iran has dispatched an estimated 7,000 troops and is providing billions of dollars in annual support to the regime of President Bashar al-Assad. How will inspectors be able to tell the difference? Israeli defense officials also are interested in long-range missiles and electronic warfare devices, as stated by people familiar with the matter, speaking on condition of anonymity because they were discussing a secret security issue.
They offered little more than mild criticism as Iranians took to the streets to celebrate the historic accord.
Kay also explains that current technology often has multiple purposes, making it suitable for both permitted and forbidden uses.
Then, of course, there is software. Of course, these are not nuclear weapons programs, but maybe that will change in the not so distant future. It also subjects Iran to the most intrusive inspection procedure ever imposed upon a sovereign country. That could send the signal to Iran that there’s no need to make any concessions to the US, on any issue.
That deal doesn’t merely show that the US is unwilling to exact a price from states that illicitly develop nuclear weapons. The conservative factions rest on layers of the state apparatus, such as the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corp, and the ruling elites that have managed to expand their influence and business under the economic blockade and are more oriented to Russian Federation and China. With enough weapons-grade uranium to build a bomb in one year, the only thing missing is a delivery device. An editorial in the conservative Kayhan newspaper declared on Wednesday that the deal was “not promising” and that the gap between its contents and Iranian demands was “very big and inexcusable”.
“The strategic foreign policy analysis, the national intelligence information, and America’s allies in the region’s intelligence all predict not only the same outcome of the North Korean nuclear deal but worse”, he wrote, referring to Pyonyang’s successful development of an atomic bomb. We understand that it seems to be President Obamas intention to do exactly that. The fact that he apparently still clings to this notion is deeply disconcerting.
Yet, in the fantasy land that is Official Washington, the politicians and pundits decry “Iranian aggression”, parroting the propaganda theme dictated by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu when he spoke before an adoring audience of senators and congressmen at a joint session of Congress on March 3.
Rep. Louie Gohmert (R-Tyler), who represents Angelina and Nacogdoches counties, called the agreement “an ultimate betrayal of Israel, Egypt and moderate Muslim nations everywhere”, as well as an “absolute gift to terrorism by the Obama administration“.
