Monday, December 02, 2013

Iran's Rouhani: ‘Our Enrichment Will Never Stop’

http://in2eastafrica.net/wp-content/uploads/2013/08/Hassan-Rouhani.jpg

Yet another indication of how thoroughly President Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry were played in the Iran-agreement-that-wasn't-an-agreement are Iranian President Hassan Rouhani's remarks, now that Iran has already received the cash it was promised and the sanctions regime is dismantled, never to be assembled again.

The so-called agreement President Obama announced to the nation two Saturdays ago claimed that in exchange for sanctions relief, Iran was essentially 'freezing' its nuclear program for six months and only enriching uranium to 5%. Rouhani, according to the government Iranian news agency FARS sees it differently:

Earlier this month, President Rouhani underlined that Iran as a signatory to the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) is entitled to continue uranium enrichment, and will never stop the activity.

“Enrichment, which is one part of our nuclear right, will continue, it is continuing today and it will continue tomorrow and our enrichment will never stop and this is our redline,” Rouhani said on a state TV channel on Tuesday night.

In relevant remarks on Tuesday, Iranian Deputy Foreign minister and senior nuclear negotiator Abbas Araqchi said the recent nuclear deal signed between Tehran and the world powers in Geneva secures Iran’s right of enrichment based on the NPT.

Commenting on the US Secretary of State John Kerry's words that "the nuclear deal with Iran doesn't include right to enrich uranium", Araqchi explained that there is some misunderstanding over the issue.


And the enrichment percentage? In the same interview, Rouhani said that the “uranium enrichment operation depends on the country’s nuclear facilities’ needs.”

There's 'some misunderstanding', all right.

The Iranians, by the way are planning a second nuclear facility in the province of Bushehr. The Head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) Ali Akbar Salehi made a point of saying, “We are not obliged to introduce to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) the nuclear facilities that we are to build in the future and only 180 days before entry of nuclear substances there, we will inform the IAEA of them.”

No talkee, no watchee, no lookee.

So apparently the part about limiting centrifuges that was in the agreement and the whole 'transparency' thing was also 'some misunderstanding'.

Yet the president's media allies are still yakking it up about this wonderful agreeement...

3 comments:

louielouie said...

‘Our Enrichment Will Never Stop’

i couldn't help but take note of ff title to his essay.
if marvin gaye were around, i'm thinking a 60s hit went unwritten.
perhaps the HDH brain trust could take this and run with it.
"higher and higher"

Change Iran Now said...

The speed and almost reckless haste of negotiations is more an indication of the precarious nature of the President of the United States and his party in terms of their negative slide in opinion polls with the failure and criticism over its policies such as the Affordable Care Act. Presidents in trouble have often sought a quick home run politically with a perceived foreign policy victory. We don’t have to look much further than the previous President’s use of the “surge” in Afghanistan in an attempt to divert the public’s attention from the collapse of the financial markets at home.

Rob said...

Hi Change Iran Now,
Well, according to the Iranians, virtually everything President Obama and Secretary Kerry told the American people about the supposed 'deal' was an outright lie, and that came out quickly enough so that aside from True Believers, no one, and certainly no informed person thinks of what's just occurred with Iran as even a bunt single, let alone a home run.

BTW, President Bush never used surge strategy in AFPak...I think you mean Iraq instead. And in any event, the Surge - which essentially was designed to bribe/convince the Sunni tribes to fight alongside us against AQ in Iraq and allow a graceful retreat.

IMO, it was more camouflage for the lack of progress and increased casualties from President's Bush's ridiculous attempt at nation building then camouflage for any failure of financial markets, which occure4d in 2008, long after the surge had demonstrated its effect and the distribution of forces agreement had been negotiated (Bush signed it in early 2009, I believe, before he left office).

Regards.
Rob