ANALYZING THE PREPOSTEROUS IRANIAN NUCLEAR DEAL

The preservation of the Jews is really one of the most single and illustrious acts of divine Providence… and what but a supernatural power could have preserved them in such a manner as no other nation upon earth hath been preserved.  Nor is the providence of God less remarkable in the destruction of their enemies, than in their preservation… We see that the great empires, which in their turn subdued and oppressed the people of God, are all come to ruin… And if such hath been the fatal end of the enemies and oppressors of the Jews, let it serve as a warning to all those, who at any time or upon any occasion are for raising a clamor and persecution against them.

Thomas Newton – Bishop of Bristol, England (1704 -1782)

Donald Trump Dumps the Iranian Deal

On May 8, 2018 U.S. President Donald Trump announced America would no longer be party to the much controversial Joint Comprehensive Program of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iranian nuclear deal, which the Islamic Republic of Iran entered into on July 14, 2015 with a group of five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council and the European Union.

Trump’s pronouncement was half expected, although it left many more observers than not aghast at what they felt was a major foreign policy blunder by the incumbent American leader. Many called Trump’s exiting the nuclear deal a reckless and dangerous strategy. All of the other parties to the JCPOA agreement, including Iran, naturally, denounced the decision. The P5 +1 nations (five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council) i.e. China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, plus Germany, and the European Union, indicated their continued strong commitment to the nuclear plan.

Former U.S. President Barack Obama, who at one time vowed he would never allow Iran, as the world’s premier facilitator of terrorism, to develop or acquire a nuclear bomb, was himself at the forefront of the JCPOA agreement that funneled scores of billions of dollars to the Islamic Republic. The parties to the Iranian nuclear deal i.e. the P5+1 and the European Union nations, along with innumerable shortsighted and unthinking observers around the world helped engineer a surreal environment of preposterous and farcical expectations. Obama himself morphed into an obsessed, legacy-seeking, outbound ruler of the world’s foremost democracy.

Even after Trump’s recent announcement, about three years into the Iranian nuclear deal – a decision based on clear indications that Iran could not be trusted to honor its end of the accord – many supporters remained convinced the JCPOA agreement was a practical and innovative attempt towards helping to secure international peace and steer the Islamic Republic along a path of nuclear industrialization instead of the acquisition of a nuclear bomb.

Supporters on the Iranian nuclear deal, including the leaders of the PR+1 and European Union nations labor under a swath of delusion. These pathetic souls envision an Iran that abandons its quest for nuclear weaponry; an Iran that seeks to establish honest, international trade relations; an Iran that forsakes its totalitarian, jihadist proclivities, and an Iran that institutes a government far removed from the current political and social infrastructure that continuously deprives its people of basic human rights and summarily murders those who disagree with its warped ideals.

The most irrational self-deception of those who recline and wait for the miraculous transformation of a nation considered by an overwhelming majority of people to be the premier facilitator of domestic and international terrorism is that if the rest of the world does not kowtow to the stipulations of the Iranian nuclear deal and lift sanctions instituted against the Islamic Republic and flood its coffers with multiple billions of dollars, the deserved alternative is war.

Of a truth, war is not an alternative to the JCPOA. War will be the result of the enactment of the laughably unwise agreement. Barack Obama’s Secretary of State John Kerry (2013-2017), after Iranian leaders gleefully welcomed billions of dollars thrust into their hands as a result of the lifting of sanctions and the releasing of retroactive funding shortly after the enactment of nuclear deal – money supposedly earmarked for rebuilding the country and pursuing industrial nuclear advancement – admitted that some of the money would inevitably fall into the hands of Islamic jihadists. Only the dolefully imperceptive observer would deny that the Iranians, even as they rejoice over the outrageously huge windfall, will continue aiding and abetting domestic and international terrorism, murdering and menacing their Middle Eastern neighbors, violating the rights of their own people, killing dissidents, and developing ballistic missiles. Meanwhile, the P5 +1 nations and the European Union nations wait with bated breath for Iranian theocrats to “turn from their wicked ways.”

It is incomprehensible that people around the world would lend any measure of credibility to an arrangement such as the Iranian nuclear deal when the nation’s theocratic regime unreservedly and perennially call for America’s destruction and the Jewish nation of Israel’s as well. As a matter of fact, Iran, in circumvention of the nuclear deal, even if only in spirit, launched two ballistic missiles in March of 2016 (close to a year after the JCPOA agreement went into effect) that carried the message “Israel must be wiped out.” Also, Iran’s notoriety as a principal exporter of terrorism and mayhem is common knowledge.

The Iranian nuclear deal, from the beginning, was fraught with irregularities and inconsistencies. Indeed, opponents of the agreement allege much dishonesty and inveiglement on the part of the deal’s originators and promoters. Numerous concessions, the terms of which Iran dictated, ensured the Islamic Republic would evade its responsibilities, while appearing to comply with assigned directives. Certain verification procedures whereby the UN’s International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) would inspect Iran’s nuclear goings-on and report its findings to the United Nations and other monitoring organizations took on the guise of a surreptitious, private agenda distinctly slanted in Iran’s favor.

The Obama administration was desperate to make the JCPOA agreement a reality. It was clear many Americans did not support the deal. The nuclear deal between Iran and the P5+1 countries and the European Union nations is a farce, whereby the USA especially, not only facilitates Iran’s enrichment of uranium (required for the development of a nuclear bomb) but helps to protect the rogue nation’s nuclear facilities.

Obama apologists, in spite of the forgoing revelations, decried Trump’s decision to exit the nuclear deal, or put alternatively, insisted on supporting a downright dangerous agreement with the Iranians; a plan that imperils the entire Middle East and other nations across the globe. To add insult to injury, JCPOA supporters, in a perfunctory departure from commonsensical thinking, sought to suggest two eerie implications of the American president’s abandonment of the deal, i.e.  (1) Trump’s decision isolates the United States, and (2) Trump’s decision implies that America is untrustworthy.

The aforementioned two insinuations are bereft of logic and equanimity.

Firstly, Donald Trump’s refusal to continue to be a part of the Iranian nuclear deal does not isolate the United States. Rather, such a rejection of the deal proves America is a standalone, indispensable nation in the global arena. Other nations will have to decide whether they wish to transact business with the USA or Iran, the latter a flagitious nation with a regime that breaks all the rules – economically, socially, politically, religiously, socially and militaristically. It is a forgone conclusion that America’s totalitarian allies in Europe cannot afford to isolate the Western superpower. They need America’s markets, and America itself as a safeguard against the uncertainty and volatility that pervade the international political and economic environment.

The totalitarians are upset because they would prefer to play the game with a double-edged sword whereby they benefit from doing business with America, and simultaneously engage in profitable deals with America’s enemies. Such a strategy does not amount to isolation. It is deception, which a leader like Donald Trump, as long as he is serious about alienating the anarchic Republic of Iran from the rest of the democratic world, will put to naught.

Secondly, the contention by Obama Democrats, Iran, and transnational progressives that the United States cannot be trusted is specious and unreasoned – for the simple fact that the Iranian nuclear deal or the JCPOA agreement did not represent America’s word or undertaking. The horrendous deal was Obama’s legacy venture.

America’s European allies are fully aware that a president cannot unilaterally bind the United States to any international agreement. Barack Obama did not attempt to enter into a treaty with Iran and the P5+1 nations and the European Union because he knew the American people did not support the deal for the most part. Were the Iranian nuclear deal been subject to America’s constitutional process for ratifying international commitments, there would be no such accord today.

The rest of this chapter takes the form of a somewhat lengthy discussion about the Iranian nuclear deal, or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), including its history. Hopefully, it may provide adequate information to enable the enquiring reader to arrive at an informed opinion about the deal’s moral legitimacy, or its absence thereof, among other considerations, and whether Donald Trump’s decision to terminate America’s participation in the accord was justifiable.

The Iranian Nuclear Deal or Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA)

Truth, they say, is sometimes stranger, or more incredible than fiction. In the case with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), or the Iranian nuclear deal with America, Great Britain, Germany, China, Russia, France and the European Union, the aforementioned adage is brought to the fore in a numbingly frightening way. Who would have anticipated some forty years ago, notwithstanding Iran’s already loathsome and misdirected scorn for Israel and Jews in general, the Muslim nation’s present-day unbridled, venomous call for the destruction of an entire nation and people. What is more shocking is that Iran’s leaders openly continue to advocate unmitigated hatred for Israel and Jews and America and its primarily Christian population, even as a lamentably misguided axis of a number of the world’s premier nations, including the United States of America, seeks to embrace Iran’s revolutionary regime in a nuclear armament deal that defies all logic and inborn commonsense.

The despicable rhetoric of Sayyid Al Khameni, Iran’s so-called supreme leader, and the country’s president Hassan Rouhani flies in the face of the world leaders involved in the implementation of the Iranian deal as they uninhibitedly encourage the obliteration of Israel and its Jewish inhabitants and simultaneously disparage America for its affiliation with the Jewish nation.

Unfathomably, at the helm of the group of free world nations that brokered the JCPOA agreement with Iran was Barack Hussein Obama, the former President of the United States of America. Obama is decidedly one of America’s most litigious leaders, and contrary to the favorable view the country’s liberal news media continues to divulge to an unwary global audience, he was, and remains a markedly controversial individual.

Obama’s deplorable record in the areas of health care, foreign affairs, race relations, public corruption, religious (anti-Christian) bias, and fiscal policy among other considerations, continues to tug at the heartstrings of countless Americans. A discussion of such topics, however, is outside the scope of this book.

The subject of the Iranian Nuclear Deal, or the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), notwithstanding the author’s forgone conclusion that the plan or arrangement is one mired in unprecedented foolhardy and recklessness, is a complex issue and entails much inquiry and explanation, especially for the benefit of those unacquainted with the truth of the matter. It is for such a reason the author devotes two chapters to a discussion about the nuclear deal. This chapter delves into the history of the Islamic Republic of Iran and its role as the world’s premier sponsor of state terrorism, and the eminent danger the rogue nation poses to the Jewish nation of Israel especially, and the rest of the world at large.

The fact that Iranian despots brazenly and persistently call for the annihilation of Israel and Jews lends to a palpable measure of relevance for the inclusion of two chapters about the Iranian nuclear deal or the JCPOA agreement in this book. The central theme of the publication, after all, is the remarkable story of the survival and progress of the Jews over the past many centuries – against all odds!

The Mechanics of the Iranian Nuclear Deal

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), commonly known as the Iran deal or Iran nuclear deal, is an international agreement on Iran’s nuclear program reached in Vienna on July 14, 2015 between Iran, the P5+1 (the five permanent members of the United Nations Security Council—China, France, Russia, United Kingdom, United States plus Germany), and the European Union. 1 Formal negotiations in connection with the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on Iran’s nuclear program began with the adoption of the Joint Plan of Action, an interim agreement signed between Iran and the P5+1 countries in November 2013. For the next twenty months, Iran and the P5+1 countries engaged in focused negotiations, and in April 2015 agreed on an Iran nuclear deal framework for the final agreement. Iran and the P5+1 nations agreed on the plan in July 2015.

Under the agreement, Iran agreed to eliminate its stockpile of medium-enriched uranium, cut its stockpile of low-enriched uranium by 98%, and reduce by about two-thirds, the number of its gas centrifuges for 13 years. For the next 15 years, Iran will only enrich uranium up to 3.67%. Iran also agreed not to build any new heavy-water facilities during the same period of time. The JCPOA accord limits uranium-enrichment activities to a single facility using first-generation centrifuges for 10 years. Other facilities will undergo modifications to avoid proliferation risks. To monitor and verify Iran’s compliance with the agreement, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will have regular access to all Iranian nuclear facilities. The agreement provides that in return for verifiably abiding by its commitments, Iran will receive relief from U.S., European Union, and United Nations Security Council nuclear-related economic sanctions.

A CONDENSED TIMELINE OF THE IRANIAN NUCLEAR DEAL

Finalization Day – July 14, 2015

JCPOA negotiators reached an agreement, and Iran and the P5+1 nations endorsed the nuclear plan.

UNSC Endorsement Day – July 20, 2015

The United Nations Security Council (UNSC) endorsed the JCPOA agreement and passed a unanimous vote to terminate all prior UN sanctions, beginning on Implementation Day (subject to re-imposition via a snapback mechanism).

Adoption Day – October 18, 2015

Participants in the JCPOA agreement adopted the nuclear plan.

Implementation Day – January 16, 2016

The International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) issued confirmation that Iran fulfilled performance of a number of tasks that satisfied preliminary conditions pertinent to the nuclear deal and took the key steps to restrict its nuclear program. Iran supposedly put measures in place to facilitate increased monitoring. The IAEA’s report on implementation day triggered multiple United States, European Union and United Nations sanctions relief.

The United Nations lifts its conventional arms sanctions after five (5) years, i.e. in 2021.

Transition Day – October 2023

Transition Day occurs seven years after adoption day (or when the IAEA reaches its broader conclusion on Iran’s nuclear program, whichever is sooner). Adoption day triggers the following activities relative to the nuclear deal.

  • United Nations lifts missile restrictions.
  • Iran seeks ratification of its additional protocol.
  • The European Union terminates all remaining nuclear sanctions.
  • United States removes certain entities from the sanctioned list.
  • United States seeks legislative termination of certain sanctions.

The United Nations lifts its ballistic missiles sanctions after seven (7) years, i.e. in 2024.

The deal allows Iran to use up to 30 advanced centrifuges in test cascades.

Termination Day – October 2025

Termination Day arrives ten years after adoption day. Resolution 2231 ends on Termination day, and the United Nations’ Security Council closes the file on the Iranian nuclear deal or JCPOA.

Research & Development of enrichment technology no longer has limits.

 Post Termination Day – 2030, 2035, 2040

After 2030 – Physical restraints on enrichment cease.

After 2035 – IAEA monitoring of centrifuge production ends.

After 2040 – IAEA monitoring of uranium production ends.

Full implementation of Non-Proliferation Treaty and Additional Protocol ensues.

 WHY IRAN CANNOT BE TRUSTED

Iranian rulers historically have been untrustworthy in honoring international peace-keeping commitments. As it is with the majority of leaders in fundamentalist Muslim nations, Iranian rulers combine authoritarian politics with an oppressive religious mandate that seeks to stifle, by violence and annihilation if necessary, any opposition, domestic and foreign, to the furtherance of their goals. Present day Iran is no different.

The Iranian regime is a theocracy of Shiite Islamists who perceive their role as one called into existence by divine appurtenance. Their ideology espouses the requirement that Muslims wage global jihad in order to bring as many people as possible under submission to the dictates of a universal caliphate, which shall be ushered in by the appearance of a messianic figure called the Madhi. The jihad, or endeavor to subjugate non-Muslims and bring them under Islamic governance extends to summary extermination of those who resist conversion.

Current Iranian rulers stand out as unabashed Jewish, Christian and non-Muslim hatemongers who have no qualms about calling for the destruction of Israel and its Jewish and Christian inhabitants, and all who would lend even token support for the rights of Israelis to defend themselves against unceasing, unprovoked Palestinian attacks on their safety, well-being and also their lives.

The ingrained hatred for Jews by Arabs and fundamentalist Muslims in Iran and in just about every other Muslim nation in the Middle East is a forgone conclusion. Former Iranian president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (2005 -2013), in contradiction of proven and acknowledged history, shamelessly denied that the Holocaust, or the merciless extermination of millions of Jews by the Nazis during the Second World War, ever took place. 2 The Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas (2005 – ), is another prominent Muslim leader who claims that the Holocaust never took place. 3

Reason One – Iran is the World’s Foremost Sponsor of Terrorism

Iran has a history of participating in and sponsoring terrorism. The republic’s terrorist activity encompasses acts of atrocity for over 30 years in no less than 25 countries on five continents – from Israel to Iraq, from Bulgaria to Argentina. 4 Iran’s global network has reaches even in the United States of America. The Islamist Republic also operates an “intelligence and terrorist network” in South American nations such as Brazil, Paraguay, Chile, Colombia, Guyana, Trinidad and Tobago, and Suriname, among other countries.

In addition to being actively involved in terrorist activities across the globe, Iran funds and supports various well-known terrorist organizations like Hezbollah in Lebanon and Islamic Jihad and Hamas in Palestine. Many such groups played a hand in the murder of thousands of American soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon. 5 The U.S. government consistently maintains Iran is the world’s leading state sponsor of terrorism, availing an extensive array of weaponry, funding, intelligence, safe harbor and logistical reinforcement to Shiite and Sunni terrorists. There is compelling evidence to support the contention that Iran’s elite Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC) directly engages in acts of terrorism.

The prevailing consensus of opinion is that Iran directly and/or indirectly assumed roles in the following acts of terrorism over the years.

  1. The 1992 bombing of the Israeli embassy in Argentina that left 29 people dead.
  2. The 1994 bombing of a Jewish cultural center in Buenos Aires in which 85 people lost their lives.
  3. The 1996 Khobar Towers bombing in Saudi Arabia that killed 19 U.S. soldiers.
  4. The undertaking to target visitors from Israel and the Western hemisphere in 2006. The Azerbaijan government arrested 15 people.
  5. The 2007 terrorist plot against New York’s John F. Kennedy airport to blow up fuel tanks and pipelines leading to the terminal.
  6. The 2008 attempt to bomb the Israeli embassy in Baku, Azerbaijan.
  7. The 2011 plot to assassinate the Saudi Arabian ambassador to the U.S. by bombing a Washington D.C. restaurant he frequented. The two-man terrorist cell collaborated with Mexican drug cartel members in attempting the kill. United States government officials managed to foil the plot.
  8. The 2011 bid by the two-man terrorist cells mentioned above to bomb the Saudi and Israeli embassies in Washington, D.C. and in Argentina. Authorities averted the attacks.
  9. The U.S. State Department reported Iran’s involvement in the attempted assassinations of Israeli diplomats in India and Georgia, USA, in 2012, and in bomb plots in Thailand and Nigeria.
  10. Authorities strongly suspect Iran and Hezbollah played a significant role in the July 2012 bombing of a bus in Bulgaria, the vehicle laden with Israeli tourists. Six people died in the attack.
  11. In February 2012, Azerbaijan authorities arrested terrorists allied with Iran and Hezbollah and circumvented a bombing campaign.
  12. An ABC News blotter reported in January 2012 that U.S. authorities prevented an Iran-linked series of terrorist attacks in Bahrain.

Iran’s readiness to aid and abet terrorism across the world, and its willingness to provide advanced weapons of destruction to its operatives make it entirely credible that the Islamist republic would also supply their terrorist affiliates with nuclear weaponry if it feels doing so is expedient for the accomplishment of its sinister and vile objectives. 6

Reason Two – Iran Repeatedly Calls for the Destruction of Israel and the Annihilation of Jews

 Iranian leaders Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Mahmaoud Ahmadinejad, and Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh made the following unconscionable remarks in the recent past.

It is jurisprudential justification to kill all the Jews and annihilate Israel, and in that, the Islamic government of Iran must take the helm. 7

The Zionist regime (Israel) and the Zionists (Jews) are a cancerous tumor. The Nations of the region will soon finish off the usurper Zionists in the Palestinian land… A new Middle East will definitely be formed. With the grace of God and help of the nations, in the Middle East there will be no trace of the Americans and Zionists. 8

Iran will support any nation or group that attacks the “cancerous tumor” of Israel. 9

It will be a great honor for combatants and defense forces of the Islamic Iran to realize the ideal of the annihilation of the Zionist (Israeli) regime and shape the new Middle East on the basis of the will of regional Muslim states. 10

Anyone who loves freedom and justice must strive for the annihilation of the Zionist (Israeli) regime in order to pave the way for world justice and freedom. 11

Israel “is the main cause of human deterioration, this being a corrupt minority group, anti-human and anti-divine values, and an organized and united front against all the heavenly values. The Zionists are defective human beings who solely pursue power, money, and control over others. They have a past of two thousand years of fomenting rebellion and tensions in the world. 12

It boggles the sane intellect that Iranian leaders, who are responsible for trampling on the rights of millions of people in their own country and abroad, and who orchestrate murder, mayhem and intimidation globally, should accuse a small, peace-seeking nation trying only to survive, of the same atrocities and indiscretions, and simultaneously deny their own evil perpetrations.

The State of Israel comprises an area that measures about one-sixth of one percent of the Arab world, and Jews, the majority of Israel’s inhabitants, number about 6.5 million. The population of the Arab world, made up of almost 100% of Middle Eastern Arabs and Muslims, numbers about 370 million. 13 The knowledgeable observer, or one who relegates revisionist, anti-Zionist historical perspectives to their rightful place of incredulity, labors to understand how anyone could be as inconsiderately greedy as the Arabs and Palestinians who in concert, own 99.833 percent of the entire Middle East, yet want to take even the .0016 percent of land that has been home to Jews for over three thousand years. Make no mistake about it, but the people who call themselves Palestinians, an ethnicity that is more convenient than it is justified, are a transplanted nation that came into existence only some decades ago, after the 1948 War of Independence when Arab and Muslim opportunists and hatemongers engineered a flood of refugees into the Holy Land.

As if the aforementioned abysmal state of affairs were not enough, Muslim and Arab Middle Eastern nations, with Iran at the helm and Palestine in tow, do not only want land that does not belong to them, but they are bent on slaughtering the Jews and other non-Muslims who live there.

By negotiating a nuclear deal with Iran, Barack Obama, along with the leaders of Great Britain, Germany, China, Russia, France and European Union nations, set the stage for fomenting widespread conflict and bloodshed in the Middle East and its environs, and also for jettisoning the State of Israel and its inhabitants to possible permanent ruin and destruction. These misguided, terrorist appeasing men and women stand to bloody their hands into perpetuity.

It is interesting to note that the Jewish population in Iran dwindled from about 100,000 in 1948 to under 10,400 by the year 2016.  14 Iranians forced Jews out of the Republic and proscribed them from returning. Iran, like a number of other Middle Eastern Arab countries, was home to countless Jews for over two thousand years. The autocrats who ruled these nations uprooted Jews from their homes and ordered them to leave, and not to return.

It is ironic that Arabs and Muslims in the Middle East, themselves technically “occupiers” of land that beforetime belonged to Christians and non-Muslims, would want to drive Jews out of Israel and claim Jewish land that measures even less than one percent of the present Arab world – land that Jews have lived in for over three thousand years – and the world at large is party to their mendacity and greed!

Reason Three – Iran Advocates a Profoundly Anti-Western, Anti-American and Anti-Semitic Philosophy

It strains the rational mind to try to understand why the former American president Barack Obama would be at the forefront, or would even be a secondary player in facilitating a nuclear deal with Iran, the world’s foremost exporter of terrorism.

Iranian leaders spare no effort in denouncing and maligning the Unites States of America and in expressing their disgust at America’s support for Israel, and at the USA’s affiliation with countries around the world that seek to combat terrorism and Islamic extremism. Recent history records Iran’s implication in murderous attacks on American soldiers in Iraq, Afghanistan and Lebanon, among other places.

One recalls with disgust the attacks by Hezbollah in Beirut, Lebanon in October, 1983 whereby terrorists sent a delivery van laden with 18,000 pounds of explosives into a U.S. Marine barracks, and almost immediately after, detonated a car bomb at a French military building some four miles away. Two hundred and forty-one American, and fifty-eight French soldiers, all members of the Multi-National Forces of Lebanon, lost their lives. The attacks, perpetrated under the inspectorate of Iran’s rulers, announced the naissance of Hezbollah, a Lebanese Shiite group, which today is a dangerous, anti-Western organization committed to upholding the baleful and disturbing agenda of radical Islam in the Middle East and around the world.

Other terrorist attacks on Americans in which Iran directly and/or indirectly played a role over the years include the following:

  1. On November 4, 1979 radical Islamic students stormed the U.S Embassy building in Tehran and took fifty-two American citizens captive. U.S. president Jimmy Carter severed diplomatic relations on April 8, 1980 with Iran after negotiations for the hostages’ release fell through. Americans undertook a top-secret mission called Operation Desert Claw to free the hostages, but aborted the exercise on April 25. Eight U.S. servicemen perished when a helicopter and a refueling plane crashed. The hostages finally gained their freedom on January 20, 1981, after 444 days in captivity.
  2. The April 18, 1983 bombing of the U.S. embassy in Beirut, Lebanon left sixty-three people dead after terrorists drove a pickup truck laden with explosives into the building. Seventeen of the victims were Americans. The Reagan administration claimed Hezbollah, the Lebanese militant Islamic, anti-U.S. group inspired by the Iranian revolution, was responsible for the assault. Further, many felt Hezbollah operatives received financial and logistical support from both Iran and Syria. The U.S. government did not undertake any military action in response to the embassy bombing.
  3. On December 12, 1983, terrorists bombed the American embassy in Kuwait, in addition to attacking the French embassy, the control tower at the airport, the country’s main oil refinery, and a residential zone that housed employees of the American corporation Raytheon. Six people died and eighty sustained injuries. The prime suspects in the attacks were members of an Iranian-backed group called “Al Dawa”, its members who were mainly Shiites opposed to Iraq’s Saddam Hussein.

The U.S. military did not retaliate to the attacks, although the authorities arrested and convicted seventeen people in Kuwait in connection with the incidents. Mustafa Youssef Badreddin, a close relative of Imad Mughniyah, a senior Hezbollah officer, received the death sentence for his participation in the bombings. In 1990, when Iraq invaded Kuwait, the Iraqis mistakenly released the “Kuwait 17” or “Al Dawa 17”, as Badreddin and the convicted terrorists had come to be known. Badreddin’s whereabouts are presently unknown.

  1. The 10-year-long Lebanese hostage taking crisis spanned from 1981 to 1992, and resulted in the kidnapping of thirty Westerners, including a number of Americans. U.S. authorities believed the Iranian backed terrorist organization Hezbollah orchestrated most of the kidnappings. Among the Americans kidnapped were David Dodge, President of the American University of Beirut, the journalist Terry Anderson, American University of Beirut librarian Peter Kilburn, and Benjamin Weir, a Presbyterian minister. A number of the prisoners, including Anderson, who was a captive for 2,454 days, survived, while others, including CIA Station Chief William Buckley, died or met their deaths at the hands of their abductors.

President Ronald Reagan struck an unprecedented deal with Iranian authorities, which permitted the sales of arms to the Islamist Republic in exchange for the release of the hostages. All told, only three captives gained their freedom, including the American Benjamin Weir.

  1. On December 3, 1984, terrorists hijacked Kuwait Airways Flight 221, en route to Pakistan, and commandeered the plane to Tehran. The hijackers called for the release of the “Kuwait 17” (see 3. above), and killed two Americans when the USA refused to comply. Some days later, Iranian security forces boarded the plane and freed the hostages.

Iranian authorities arrested the hijackers, promising to try them for the crime. The trial never took place, and the Iranians instead allowed the terrorists to leave the country. The U.S. military did not respond to the hijacking. Newspaper reports later implicated Hezbollah leader Imad Mughniyah (see 3. above) in the hijacking.

  1. Terrorists hijacked TWA Flight 847 en route from Athens to Rome on June 14, 1985, and forced-landed the plane in Beirut, Lebanon. The hijackers demanded the release of the “Kuwait 17” (see 3 & 5 above) as well as the release of 700 fellow Shiite Muslim prisoners held in Israeli prisons, and in prisons in southern Lebanon overseen by the Israeli-backed Southern Lebanon Army. The terrorists executed U.S. Navy diver Robert Dean Stethem and dumped his body on the airport tarmac after the U.S. rebuffed their demands. U.S. sources linked the terrorist organization Hezbollah to the hijacking.

Four terrorists, including Imad Mughniyah, were indicted in 1987 for the TWA hijacking. Authorities arrested Mohammed Ali Hamadei, one of the men charged in the crime, in Frankfurt, Germany. A German court convicted and sentenced him to life in prison for his participation in the hijacking. Imad Mughniyah, after remaining at large for nineteen years, died in a car bombing in Damascus, Syria on February 12, 2008.

Even as Iran negotiated the recently concluded nuclear deal with America, Great Britain, Germany, France, Russia, China and the European Union, Iranian leaders brazenly voiced their hatred for America, Israel, and Western culture and ethos in general. They continue to do so.

It might surprise many people to learn there is an observance known as “Quds International Day” (Quds Day) in Iran. Iranians observe Quds Day on the last Friday of Ramadan to express their support for Palestine and simultaneously, their opposition to “Zionism” and Israel. The late Imam Ruhollah Musavi Khomeni, founder of the Islamic Republic of Iran, initiated Quds Day in 1979, ostensibly to unify the Muslim world and “liberate” the Palestinian people from the “Zionist entity’s” (Israel’s) so-called occupation of Arab land.

Prominent aspects of Quds Day activities include rally cries of “Death to America” and “Death to Israel”, and the burning of effigies of leaders of America, Israel and Saudi Arabia. During, Quds Day, Iranians, prompted by their authoritarian leaders, assail the legitimacy of the State of Israel (“The Little Satan”) and threaten Israel and the USA (“The Big Satan”) with destruction.

In 2015, the year in which the P5+1 and European Union nations ratified the Iranian nuclear deal or the JCPOA agreement, Iran staged its traditional Quds Day rallies on July 10 in 770 cities across the republic. Iranian President Hassan Rouhani attended a rally in Tehran during which demonstrators torched posters of President Obama (America), Prime Minister Netanyahu (Israel) and King Salman (Saudi Arabia). Rouhani, the media said, did not utter a murmur a word of protest or reprimand.

In an even more demeaning affront to America, in March of 2015, on the day after President Barack Obama appealed to Iran to seize a “historic opportunity” for a nuclear deal and a better future, and as US Secretary of State John Kerry alleged substantial progress toward an agreement, the Iranian leader Ali Khamenei called for America’s destruction. Khamenei is reported to have responded to shouts of “Death to America” by a crowd he addressed in Tehran by saying, “Of course yes, death to America, because America is the original source of this pressure…” 15

On the Monday following Khamenei’s outburst, the White House dismissed the ayatollah’s rhetoric as words “intended for a domestic political audience.” It was a bewildering, yet asinine response that does not warrant further comment except to declare it typifies the affected behavior of bureaucrats of a political administration that is out of touch with reality.

In a separate incident related to Khamenei’s call for America’s demise, the then White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest volunteered the perplexing explanation that the Iranian leader’s threat provided justification for the negotiation of a nuclear deal with Iran. Earnest’s statement lent credence to the unthinkable – America was being bullied, or intimidated into formulating a nuclear deal with Iran. In other words, Obama, along with the leaders of Great Britain, Germany, Russia, China, France and the European Union were scared, terrorist-appeasing cowards. At least, it seemed that way.

 Reason Four – The Iranian Government is one of the World’s Most Despotic and Inhumane Regimes – It Torments Christians, Jews and other Non-Muslims, and Anyone Who Disagrees with Its Fanatical Ideology

Christian and Jewish minorities in Iran are victims of perpetual harassment and persecution. Adherents of religious belief systems other than Islam face widespread accusation, farcical prosecution, imprisonment, and even summary execution by the republic’s authoritarian regime, at the helm of which are fundamentalist, hardline Muslim clerics. Further, Iranians, who are predominantly Shiite Muslims are constantly at loggerheads with Saudi Arabians, who are mostly Sunni Muslims.

An April 12, 2013 CBN News.com article brought to the fore, the maltreatment of non-Muslims in Iran. The story mentioned the plight of imprisoned American Pastor Saeed Abedini*, who was in various Iranian jails from July 2012 to January 2017, and spoke about two Iranian Christian women who reported their own account of persecution by Iranian authorities. Marziyeh Amirizadeh and Maryam Rostampour grew up as Muslims in Iran. They met while studying theology in Turkey and converted to Christianity. The women decided, after completing their studies, to return to Iran and share their beliefs with others. In March, 2009, the Iranian authorities arrested Amirizadeh and Rostanpour, interrogated them for an entire day, and threw them into prison. The Iranian authorities subjected the women to ten separate trials and threatened them with execution if they did not deny their newfound faith. They eventually gained their freedom after being imprisoned for almost a year, and after Christians around the world publicized their story.16

*Saeed Abedini was released in January 2017 as part of the hostage exchange between America and Iran whereby five Americans were swapped for twenty-one Iranians. (See Chapter Ten for more on the aforementioned hostage exchange)

A March 23, 2014 Clarion Project analysis titled “Unprecedented Christian Persecution in Iran: UN Report” lamented the oppression of Christians in Iran under the inspectorate of the “moderate” President Hassan Rouhani. The article stated that the mistreatment of Christians in the Islamic Republic was even greater than it was under the extremist former President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. Iranian authorities regularly arrest Christians for forming “house churches,” where religious services, Bible studies and baptisms take place in people’s homes. So-called offenders face one to ten years in jail for such “crimes” against Iran’s theocratic state. The report states that of the 42 Christians arrested in 2013 just for practicing their religion privately, 35 of them faced condemnation for one or more of the aforementioned “infractions.” 17

A May 11, 2014 FoxNews.com article referenced a United States Commission on International Religious Freedom report that confirmed Christians suffer unimaginable persecution in Iran and the Arab world. The bipartisan report belabored the fact that the Obama administration was doing little to stem religious persecution of Christians in the Middle East and elsewhere. Iran, as it has been for decades, was at the forefront of fundamentalist Muslim nations considered “violators of religious freedom.” Also, conditions under which Christians and other non-Muslims live in Iran became progressively worse since the so-called moderate President Hassan Rouhani took office in 2013. 18

Freedom Declared, an international watchdog organization for religious freedom, published an article on March 10, 2015 about the launching of a joint report between The All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief and Christians in Parliament All-Party Parliamentary Group on the persecution of Christians in Iran. In the introduction of the report, the Co-Chairs of the enquiry bewailed the worsening conditions under which Christians and other religious minorities live in Iran, notwithstanding the appointment of Hassan Rouhani, a so-called moderate as President of the Islamic Republic in August, 2013. The joint report was based on evidence provided by Iranian witnesses during hearings in the British Parliament, and written submissions by human rights experts, including Dr. Ahmed Shaheed, United Nations Special Rapporteur on the situation of human rights in the Islamic Republic of Iran. 19

Baroness Berridge, chairman of the All Party Parliamentary Group on International Freedom of Religion or Belief, bewailed,

The panel heard first-hand testimony about the daily pressures and traumas that Iran’s Christians face, simply because of their faith. I am particularly concerned about the harsh treatment of those who convert to Christianity from Islam. Article 18 of the Universal Declaration of Human Rights makes it clear that every person has the right to freedom of religion or belief, including the right to convert: to change one’s faith or beliefs. We hope, pray and labor for a day when Iranians of all faiths, and of none, can live in their homeland without fear of persecution or harassment, with the full spectrum of their rights protected.” 20

Mark Kirk, a Republican senator from Illinois, USA, in responding to the United Nations report mentioned earlier, told FoxNews.com.

This report is an important reminder about the true nature of the Iranian regime. We can’t pretend we are negotiating Western moderates – we are negotiating with Islamic radicals who persecute Christians, Baha’is, other religious and ethnic minorities and women, while denying all of its citizens basic human rights – including the freedom of speech and assembly. 21

The aforementioned United Nations report accused the Iranian regime not only of persecuting Christians, but Jews, Baha’is, Zoroastrians and Dervish Muslims.

It is paradoxical that global newsmakers, especially those with liberal slants, act as though the persecution of Christians, Jews and other minorities in fundamentalist Muslim countries is something new or recent, or worse still, is non-existent, or such news is fabrication.

Reason Five – Iran is Notorious for Misrepresenting the Truth about Its Nuclear Weapons Program and for Pursuing a Nuclear Bomb under the Pretext of Participating in Peaceful Negotiations.

It is paradoxical that executives of the United Nations and leaders of the free world would allow themselves to be hoodwinked into believing Iranian leaders are pursuing a nuclear program for peaceful purposes, when there exists so much evidence to the contrary. Many ostensibly rational and well-meaning political and social leaders in some of the world’s most progressive nations, including the USA, cajole themselves into trusting Iranian authorities to uphold their end of the Iranian or JCPOA agreement to engage in nuclear research and experimentation for only legitimate and justifiable energy producing reasons.

The Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, in a December 3, 2015 article, decried the untrustworthiness of Iran’s leaders in sharing information about its nuclear program. The article, titled “Iran Lied about Its Nuclear Program. What is the United States Going to Do about It?, seemed to be an inference to Barack Obama’s regime in obfuscating the truth about Iran’s real objectives in pursuing a nuclear program, which, from constructive observation of the Islamic Republic’s nuclear activities, are not in concert with an agenda of peaceful coexistence with the Islamist nation’s adversaries, including Israel. 22

The aforementioned commentary made reference to an International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) editorial that reported Tehran pursued an organized nuclear weapons endeavor through 2003, with some activities continuing into the first year of the Obama administration in 2009. The IAEA report suggested Tehran’s attempts to cover up its involvement in illegal nuclear testing “seriously undermined the agency’s ability to conduct effective verification” at the Parchin site, where some observers believe Iran carried out the hydrodynamic testing of implosion devices.

Intriguingly, the IAEA’s grave concerns about Iran’s covert nuclear weapons pursuit were left unresolved. Instead, the originators on the Islamic Republic’s deal with Unites States of America, Great Britain, Germany, China, Russia, France and the European Union incorporated the setting of a procedural timeline for additional information exchanges, questions, discussions, and a further IAEA report. Such a strategy facilitated sanctions relief decisions for the Islamic republic that were conveniently detached from the troubling issue of illegal nuclear activity.

IAEA guidelines, in order to ensure the organization effectively monitors a nation’s activities relative to its nuclear program, stipulate that a regime under observation share complete and accurate information about all nuclear undertakings. Agency officials must have access to sites, documents and equipment, and have the authority to interface with people connected in any way with nuclear goings-on. Pre-JCPOA IAEA reports state in no uncertain terms that Tehran fell short in providing complete and truthful information about its nuclear program.

The forgoing revelations notwithstanding, the Iranian nuclear deal, with its peculiarly accommodating conditions that accrue to the benefit of the Islamic Republic, and the more or less lenient approach adopted by the leaders of the pact, especially the Barack Obama regime, augur well for the country labeled the world’s chief exporter of terrorism. As a matter of fact, America’s connivance in the controversial agreement with Iran is becoming increasingly bothersome as time progresses.

In his State of the Union address on January 20, 2015, U.S. President Barack Obama made the patently ludicrous claim that “for the first time in a decade”, progress in Iran’s nuclear program had been halted and the Republic’s stockpile of enriched uranium had been reduced. Many critics felt Obama’s statements were a deliberate misrepresentation of the truth by an administration that persisted in traversing a dangerous path of denial in connection with a very volatile issue.

Obama’s contention, of course, was mired in misinformation and was probably calculatedly misleading. Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium, on the contrary, increased after 2009, the year Obama became president, and continued to mount through 2013, after the implementation of an interim nuclear agreement. The ratification of the Iranian nuclear deal augments the Islamic Republic’s march toward attaining nuclear weaponry, especially as the country’s leaders refused to honor IAEA regulations and circumvented salient stipulations of the 2013 interim agreement.

To make matters worse, the United States, with the other originators of the nuclear deal in tow, offered Iran huge, inequitable concessions that allow Iran to continue to enrich uranium, retain its enriched-uranium stockpile, and continue to pursue construction of a plutonium-producing heavy-water reactor.

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, in June 2015, intimated that the six-party superpower originators of the Iranian nuclear deal, and indeed the international community, possess “absolute knowledge” about Iran’s nuclear program. Watchdog organizations, Kerry said, boast intelligence capabilities that represent the best means to uncover Iranian duplicity. Issues about cheating, according to the Secretary of State, relate to conditions that no longer exist, whereas the current nuclear agreement points to the future and the real possibility of peaceful coexistence between Iran and the rest of the world. Kerry’s statements were speculative, and lacked even nominal validation. The fact that there is undeniable evidence of Iran’s constant non-compliance with IAEA stipulations in relation to the republic’s nuclear program confirms the illogicality of the remarks made by the U.S. Secretary of State.

In spite of the forgoing variances, the P5+1 nations, the European Union, and Iran enacted the Iranian nuclear deal. The establishment of the JCPOA agreement occasioned the lifting of sanctions that translated into scores of billions of dollars for the Islamic republic. More importantly, Iran’s circumvention of IAEA guidelines and America’s and the other deal-making nations’ refusal to address such a serious violation set a frighteningly dangerous standard. It is lucidly reasonable to anticipate other nations bent on acquiring nuclear weaponry would invoke the Iranian nuclear deal precedent, whereby the terrorist nation deliberately disregarded IAEA stipulations and sought to deceive the international community – this more so because of the insincerity on the part of the Iranian nuclear deal’s brokers in accepting the Islamic Republic’s shameful misrepresentations as evidence of compliance. Even more disconcerting was the United States administration’s, or more specifically, Barack Obama’s mendacious concessions granted to Iran relative to the satisfaction of pre-JCPOA conditions, whereby Iran’s non-compliance with prescribed levels of uranium and other nuclear enabling materials was overlooked.

Reason Six – Iran’s attaining a Nuclear Bomb Would Impel a Nuclear Arms Race in Probably the World’s Most Unstable Region – From Saudi Arabia to Egypt to Turkey and Across the Persian Gulf

Expanding on the preceding observation about IAEA non-compliance, it is not difficult to envision other autocratic Middle Eastern and Persian Gulf countries purposing to acquire nuclear arms, and citing Iran’s case, whereby actual non-compliance was deemed conformity, as an example for emulation. Of a truth, the mere acquisition by Iran of a nuclear bomb would likely compel other Middle Eastern and Persian Gulf nations to join in a nuclear arms race in one of the world’s most unstable regions, regardless of the ramifications of IAEA non-compliance.

In 2009, King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia indicated that if Iranians secured nuclear weapons, his country would pursue the acquisition of such armaments almost immediately afterwards. Subsequently, the leaders of Kuwait, Qatar and other Persian Gulf nations intimated they too were ready to arm themselves with nuclear weaponry. The calamitous implications of the unequivocal intentions of these autocratic Middle Eastern rulers trigger a mood of uneasiness and apprehension. In a region saturated with capricious, mostly Muslim theocratic regimes that are not hesitant to work in close association with terrorists, it would only be a matter of time before the deployment of nuclear weapons becomes a reality.

A November 6th 2013, British Broadcasting Corporation (BBC) release by the BBC Newsnight diplomatic and defense editor Mark Urban exposed an alarming nuclear-procurement alliance between Saudi Arabia and Pakistan. Urban intimated that Saudi Arabia invested in Pakistani nuclear weapon projects, and the Saudi leaders feel the ready availability of atomic bombs accrues to them. BBC News. 23

The forgoing observation notwithstanding, there seemed to be a strategic objective on the part of Saudi Arabia not to take delivery of its nuclear warheads, but to leave them in Pakistan. In doing so, the Saudis can effectively deny they are in possession of nuclear weapons. The actual absence of warheads in the country enables its leaders to avoid challenging Iran authorities to venture past a nuclear threshold. Pakistan also benefits from an arrangement to retain nuclear warheads that would otherwise be Saudi Arabia bound, as the international community would lack enough evidence to brand the country an “atomic cash and carry” facility.

Saudi Arabia’s aspirations toward acquiring nuclear weaponry, including missiles capable of transporting nuclear warheads over long ranges, date back decades. The Islamic prefecture secretly purchased dozens of Dong Feng – 3 (CSS-2) ballistic missiles from China in the late 1980’s. Saudi Arabia deployed the rockets in the early 1990’s after experts determined they fell short of standards required for efficient conventional weapons.

The Saudis and Iranians have long been at opposite sides of a divide engendered mainly by religious idiosyncrasies, with Saudi Arabia being the traditional epicenter of Islam’s dominant Sunni faction, and Iran the acknowledged spearhead of the minority Shia denomination. The rivalry intensified in recent years following the downfall of the Iraqi Sunni dictator Saddam Hussein and his country’s being drawn into close association with Iran, and as the latter country slowly, but evidently moved closer towards producing a nuclear bomb. The current nuclear deal between Iran and the alliance of the United States of America, Great Britain, Germany, China, Russia, France and the European Union no doubt serves to exacerbate the already strained relationship between the two Islamic powers.

Pakistan is not without its own nuclear agenda. It is more or less common knowledge that Saudi Arabia has helped finance Pakistan’s defense infrastructure for many years. Western experts are quick to contend that Pakistan directs much of such funds to its missile and nuclear laboratories. Visits by the then Saudi defense minister Prince Sultan bin Abdulaziz al Saud to a Pakistani nuclear research center in 1999 and 2002 solidified suspicions about a Saudi Arabia/Pakistan atomic defense association.

Pakistan, in its pursuit of military supremacy over India, sought assistance from China, the latter which sold the Pakistanis missiles and made available the design for a nuclear warhead. Western intelligence agencies accused the Pakistani scientist Abdul Qadeer Khan of selling uranium enrichment centrifuges and providing atomic expertise to Libya and North Korea. Khan was also under suspicion for giving the Chinese nuclear weapon designs to the two countries.

Reason Seven – Iran Leaves No Doubt that Its Nuclear Program’s Primary Objective is to create a Weapon Capable of Destroying Israel and Crippling America and Its Allies

It is no secret radical Islamist nations in the Middle East are bent on destroying Israel. Leaders of Iran, Iraq, Syria and Egypt, among others, voice their unmistakable intention to annihilate the Jewish nation. Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian president, and his government, continually advocate the destruction of Israel and its inhabitants. A nuclear Iran, as mentioned earlier, would engender an arms race in the volatile Middle East that would only serve to intensify the resolve of theocratic Muslim nations to try to wipe Israel off the face of the earth. The Jewish nation is in proximity of numerous extremist Islamic enemies hateful enough to unleash readily, by recent estimation, more than 170,000 rockets and missiles at Jewish cities and communities. 24

Reason Eight – Iran Conceivably Possesses Enough Weapons-Grade Uranium to Build a Bomb in a Matter of Months, and Owns an Advanced Ballistic Missile Arsenal

Notwithstanding the impression conveyed by Iran that it lacks enough weapons-grade uranium to produce a nuclear bomb, and the general consensus of a more or less universal opinion that the JCPOA agreement will help to monitor the Islamic Republic’s production of such material and make the world a safer place, many nuclear disarmament experts feel the Islamic Republic already possesses enough weapons-grade uranium to produce a nuclear bomb. If Iranian leaders, as they are wont to do, choose to mislead international observers about the accumulation of bomb-making materials like uranium and plutonium in their enrichment plants, then the International Atomic Energy Association (IAEA) or other monitoring agencies would be unable to gauge correctly, the republic’s capability to produce a bomb, which could be in a matter of months.

In addition, observers point to a number of clandestine concessions granted by the Obama administration and other participants in the Iranian nuclear deal at the outset of the agreement in order for Iran to appear to satisfy pre-JCPOA conditions relative to uranium stockpiles. The seeming compliance with the pre-conditions allowed the enactment of the nuclear deal, which otherwise could have been postponed, or possibly abandoned.

Furthermore, experts posit that Iran has an advanced ballistic missile arsenal, with some of the missiles capable of reaching Israel and Western Europe. Incidentally, the JCPOA agreement ignores the issue of Iran’s ballistic program, including ICBM’s, which experts believe Tehran is developing as delivery vehicles for nuclear weapons. An ICBM (intercontinental ballistic missile) is a guided missile with a range of 5,500 kilometers or 3,400 miles.

It would not be long before missiles could be developed that could hit the Unites States. 25 

A SUMMARY OF IRANIAN SANCTIONS (1979 -2017)

The Jimmy Carter Administration (1977 -1981)

The United States government first imposed sanctions against the Islamic Republic of Iran in November 1979. The sanctions did not relate to any nuclear program, but were in response to acts of terrorism and belligerency against America. Islamist radicals stormed the US embassy in Tehran and captured 52 US diplomats in the process. The Islamists held the hostages for 444 days beginning in November 1979. U.S. President Jimmy Carter tried unsuccessfully to rescue the hostages, even after authorizing a military rescue attempt.

President Carter, as the crisis intensified, declared a national emergency and utilized his statutory capacity to freeze all Iranian government and Central Bank assets. In 1980, Carter broadened the initial sanctions to constitute an embargo on all transactions with Iran. The U.S. banned imports of Iranian oil, froze some $12 billion in Iranian assets in the U.S.

The president eventually revoked the embargo on January 1981, after Iran released the hostages held in Tehran.

The Ronald Reagan Administration (1981 – 1989)

President Ronald Reagan instituted the following policies against Iran after the American government declared the Islamic republic a state sponsor of terrorism in 1983.

(a)       The U.S. ceased and opposed international loans to Iran.

(b)       President Reagan authorized naval escorts for civilian vessels after Iran threatened to disrupt/prevent travel through the Persian Gulf and the Strait of Hormuz (a strait between the Persian Gulf and the Gulf of Oman) in 1987.

(c)       Reagan signed a new embargo against Iranian imports.

(d)       The United States forbade the sale of “dual use” items (civilian goods with the possibility for military adaptation) to Iran.

The Bill Clinton Administration (1993 – 2001)

During Bill Clinton’s tenure as President of the United States (1993 – 2001), the Islamic Republic of Iran persisted as a state sponsor of terrorism.  President Clinton consequently increased sanctions against the republic in 1995, especially as there was widespread apprehension that Iran sought to develop and/or acquire weapons of mass destruction.

Clinton proscribed all U.S. involvement with the Iranian petroleum industry and, in 1997, outlawed all American investment in Iran. The president also encouraged other nations to follow America’s lead in ceasing to engage in investments in the Islamic republic.

The George W. Bush Administration (2001-2009)

The United States, during the George W. Bush administration, identified and penalized individuals and businesses that assisted Iran in helping to sponsor terrorism, by freezing their assets. The Bush administration also targeted people and businesses involved in aiding and abetting the Iranians in their efforts to undermine the Iraqis.

The U.S. also froze the assets of foreign entities perceived as aiding Iran in sponsoring terrorism and in destabilizing Iraq. The United States also banned so-called “U-turn” financial transfers involving Iran. The U.S. Treasury Department defined a U-turn transfer as a financial transaction that involved Iran but “originated and ended with non-Iranian foreign banks.”

The Barack Obama Administration (2009 -2017)

Barack Hussein Obama, President of the United States of America for two terms, was the national leader who stood at the forefront of the axis comprised of six of the world’s superpowers that formulated the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), otherwise known as the Iranian Nuclear Deal, in 2015.

The United States, Russia, Great Britain, Germany, France and China – six of the world’s most prominent nations – and European Union nations formed a coalition in 2013 to negotiate a deal with Iran that would lead to the suspension of many of the existing sanctions against the Islamic Republic if it were to cease its endeavor to develop and/or acquire nuclear weaponry.

The aforementioned agreement was followed by a “prisoner swap” in early 2017, whereby the U.S. released a total of twenty-one imprisoned Iranians for five Americans held prisoner in Iran. Additionally, the U.S. lifted all existing sanctions against Iran in 2016.

The enactment of the Iranian Nuclear Deal was, to very many people around the world, including numerous millions of Americans, and certainly to the people of the Jewish nation of Israel, a sort of anticlimax to many years of attempting to discipline a recalcitrant terrorist enabling nation, and setting it along a path of peaceful coexistence with other countries. As the author endeavors to explain in this chapter, the Iranian Nuclear Deal is a foolish and unsound arrangement, and is probably America’s greatest foreign policy blunder ever.

The forgoing view notwithstanding, the selfsame Barack Obama, previous to the JCPOA accord, implemented various sanctions against the Islamic republic in efforts to stem its inclination toward participating in and sponsoring terrorism. Some sanctions against Iran under Obama’s watch were as follows.

(a)       America banned imports of certain Iranian foods, and carpets, in 2010.

(b)       Congress permitted President Obama to tighten Iranian sanctions via the Comprehensive Iran Sanctions, Accountability, and Divestment Act (CISADA). CISADA allowed Obama to encourage non-U.S. petroleum firms to refuse to sell gasoline to Iran. Iran imports nearly one-third of its gasoline.

(c)       CISADA also prohibited foreign entities from using American banks if they did business with Iran.

(d)       The Obama Administration sanctioned Venezuela’s nationalized oil company for trading with Iran in May 2011. Venezuela and Iran are close allies.

(e)       In June 2011, the Treasury Department announced new sanctions against Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (also named in other sanctions), the Basij Resistance Force, and Iranian law enforcement entities.

(f)        In 2011 President Obama signed a defense funding bill that allowed the U.S. to cease dealing with financial institutions that do business with Iran’s central bank. The bill’s sanctions took effect between February and June 2012.

The Donald Trump Administration (2017 – )

In April 2017 newly elected President Donald Trump advised that his administration would review U.S. sanctions against Iran from a historical and current perspective. The initial fear among many people was that Trump’s decision in such a regard might jeopardize the JCPOA or 2015 Iranian nuclear deal aimed at restricting the Islamic republic’s acquiring of nuclear weapons, since Iran was still a supporter of terrorism.

A review like Trump’s, however, was allowed under JCPOA conditions, and indeed, was a mandatory requirement. See below for sanctions instituted against Iran by the US government under the Trump administration, including the re-imposing of sanctions as a result of the American president’s withdrawing from the Iranian nuclear deal.

SANCTIONS AGAINST IRAN LIFTED AFTER JCPOA ENACTMENT

The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), the monitoring body commissioned to evaluate Iran’s progress, or absence thereof, in addressing its role in the nuclear deal, indicated that Iran had honored its initial obligations. As mentioned elsewhere in this chapter, much controversy surrounds the issue about whether the Iranians actually were compliant in satisfying pre-enactment conditions relative to reducing certain nuclear stocks and nuclear facilities housed in the Islamic Republic. There were claims about secret exemptions and loopholes granted to the Iranians by the USA and the other JCPOA negotiators in order for the nuclear deal to secure passage. Obama, some observers claim, informed the U.S. Congress about the aforementioned exemptions on January 16, 2016 – after they had been granted to Iran.

Nonetheless, in January 2016, the United States of America, the European Union, and the United Nations Security Council lifted nuclear-related economic sanctions that had been leveled against Iran over the years prior to the signing of the Iran nuclear deal in 2015.

SANCTIONS IMPOSED ON IRAN SINCE THE NUCLEAR DEAL

Iran Sanctions Act – December 2016

The United States House and Senate passed a renewed Iran Sanctions Act (ISA) on December 1, 2016, which extended certain economic sanctions on the middle-eastern autocratic nation for another 10 years.

Iran’s transgression of stipulations relative to the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), which commenced in January 2016, as well as repeated breaches of United Nations Security Council resolutions, prodded the U.S. government to renew the sanctions as a punitive measure to compel compliance with the conditions of the deal. United Nations Resolution 2231, for instance, states in part that “Iran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles designed to be capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using such ballistic missile technology…”

The Middle Eastern republic, however, conducted at least four ballistic missile tests after the 2015 resolution took effect. In October and November of 2015, and on March 8, and 9, 2016, Iran test- fired ballistic missiles in direct contravention of Resolution 2231.  One of the missiles fired in March 2016 displayed the phrase “Israel should be wiped off the Earth” written on it in Hebrew.  26

In addition to performing missile tests, Iran allegedly violated JCPOA directives by covertly attempting to secure nuclear technology. The following are excerpts taken from a July 12, 2017 Homeland Security News Wire article (courtesy of “The Tower”) titled German Intelligence: Iran Still Seeking Illicit Nuclear Technology.

Reports from German intelligence agencies show that Iran is still attempting to procure illicit technology, including parts for the operation of its heavy water reactor, which was shuttered under the terms of the 2015 nuclear deal. Benjamin Weinthal reported for the Weekly Standard on Friday.

A report from the state of Hamburg concluded, “there is no evidence of a complete about-face in Iran’s atomic polices in 2016” following the announcement of the nuclear deal, which temporarily limited Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for billions in sanctions relief. Iran has continued seeking “missile carrier technology necessary for its rocket program,” the report added.

Also according to the Hamburg report, three German citizens were charged with violating export bans for sending 51 specialized valves to Iran. The parts can be used in Iran’s Arak heavy water reactor, which “can be used to develop plutonium for nuclear weapons” and was shut down as part of the nuclear deal.

In general, Iran is seeking “products and scientific know-how for the field of developing weapons of mass destruction as well as missile technology,” the report noted. 

…Weinthal reported on Saturday in the Jerusalem Post that the federal German report also found that Iran continued to surveil local Israeli and Jewish institutions. “The State of Israel, its representatives and supporters as well as members of the Jewish religious community are among the declared enemies of Iran. Even the agreement made between Iran and the Western world to settle the nuclear conflict has not changed this attitude,” the report found. “Therefore, Iranian intelligence-related organizations continue to spy on pro-Jewish and Israeli targets in Germany.”

…Last year, German intelligence agencies reported that Iran was actively seeking chemical and biological weapons capabilities in Germany. Weinthal reported earlier this year that there is evidence that Iran played a significant role in developing Syria’s chemical weapons program. 27

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, as expected, wasted no time in engaging in vituperative rhetoric after the U.S. government announced news about the renewed sanctions. Rouhani claimed:

America’s president is obliged to exercise his authority by preventing its (the renewed sanctions) approval and particularly its implementation…and if this gross violation is carried out we will firmly respond. 28

The Iranian leader further declared the ISA ruling constituted “a violation of Tehran’s nuclear deal with six major powers.”

One would think Rouhani should concern himself with adhering to the rules set forth by the United Nations and the JCPOA, instead of flouting such stipulations and then spew vile accusations. The bottom line remains – Iran is the foremost perpetrator of terrorism around the world and its leaders simply cannot be trusted to honor any agreement to help secure and maintain peace.

Iranian Sanctions – July 2017

The United States imposed economic sanctions against Iran in July 2017 on account of the Muslim Republic’s ballistic missile program, and declared that Tehran’s questionable undertakings in the Middle East put the 2015 Iran nuclear plan in jeopardy.

The U.S. government made reference to 18 parties who were involved in what it said was “illicit Iranian actions or transnational criminal activity.” The parties comprised entities and people who supported Iran’s alleged prohibited activities. Such actions included collaborating with Iran’s military or Iran’s Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) by developing drones and military equipment, producing and maintaining boats, and procuring electronic components. Other accomplices, American authorities claimed, arranged the theft of U.S. and Western software programs, which they sold to Iran’s government.

According to a statement by the U.S. State Department, “The United States remains deeply concerned about Iran’s malign activities across the Middle East that undermine regional stability, security, and prosperity.” It also said that Iran’s activities “undercut whatever ‘positive contributions’ to regional and international peace and security were intended to emerge” from the nuclear agreement between Iran and the coalition of six of the world’s most prominent nations i.e. China, France, Russia, the United Kingdom, the United States, Germany, and the European Union. 29

On Monday July 17, only the day before the announcement of the sanctions, the Trump administration said Iran was in compliance with the conditions of the nuclear agreement, but the republic was in default of the spirit of the accord, and the US government would seek to respond accordingly.

Trump previously confirmed Iran’s fulfilment of the agreement conditions after he took office in January, 2017.  He had described the nuclear plan as “the worst deal ever” during his 2016 presidential campaign, and sternly criticized then incumbent President Barack Obama, for spearheading negotiations that led to the enactment of the unprecedented accord.

White House spokeswoman Sarah Sanders articulated her own concern by saying:

Even as we continue to work to prevent Iran from ever obtaining a nuclear weapon, we cannot look away while Iran threatens our country and our allies in ways beyond their nuclear threat. 30

The U.S. State Department made mention of Iran’s affiliation with radical groups including Lebanon’s Hezbollah, the Palestinian Hamas movement, the Syrian government of President Bashar al-Assad and Houthi rebels in Yemen.

Iranian officials, in response to the announcement of the sanctions, deemed them “contemptible and worthless,” and vowed Iran would reciprocate the move by imposing sanctions on a number of American natural and legal persons and/or entities that took steps against the Iranian people and other Muslim nations in the region.

The Trump administration advised it was reviewing its policy on Iran, not only with a view towards compelling Tehran’s compliance with the nuclear deal, but also towards ensuring the Muslim republic’s activities in the Middle Eastern region did not undermine U.S. interests in Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Lebanon.

U.S. Extension of Sanctions Relief for Iran (September 2017)

Iran’s continued breach of JCPOA requirements notwithstanding, at least in the spirit of the agreement, the Trump administration extended sanctions relief to the Islamic Republic in September, 2017. President Trump nevertheless accused Tehran of not honoring the entire agreement and reiterated his election campaign declaration that the Iranian nuclear deal was bad for America and the world at large, and again opined Iran was violating its terms in spirit.

US State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert referred to provocative and belligerent Iranian action that she said demonstrated Iran’s malevolent behavior.

The administration did approve waivers in order to maintain some flexibility as we consult on Capitol Hill and among allies and partners to address the flaws in the JCPOA, and additional time to develop our policy to address the full range of Iranian malign behavior,” she said. She added that the move “should not be seen as an indication of President Trump or his administration’s position on the (nuclear deal), nor is the waiver giving the Iranian regime a pass on its broad range of malign behavior. 31

The extension of sanctions relief notwithstanding, the U.S. imposed new sanctions on Iranian companies and individuals affiliated with the Iranian Revolutionary Guards Corps, Iranian airlines, and those believed to be participants in cyberattacks on U.S. banks.

U.S. Law pertaining to the JCPOA agreement requires the U.S. president to certify to Congress every 90 days whether Iran is adhering to the agreement. If the president doesn’t certify compliance, Congress has 60 days to decide whether to re-impose sanctions lifted under the agreement.

Many opponents of the Iran deal, inside and outside the administration, remain convinced that Tehran’s full compliance with JCPOA conditions of performance, particularly on allowing nuclear inspections at military sites, is lacking. They contend, at the very least, Iran is violating the character of the agreement with its ballistic missile tests.

Renewed Sanctions on Iran Following Trump’s Exit from JCPOA (May 2018)

The U.S. Treasury Department recently released details of the sanctions America planned to levy on Iran as a result of President Donald Trump’s exiting the Iran nuclear deal on May 8, 2018.

President Trump issued a National Security Presidential Memorandum (NSPM) on May 8, 2018 directing the Secretary of State and the Secretary of the Treasury to prepare immediately for the re-imposition of all of the U.S. sanctions lifted or waived in connection with the JCPOA or Iranian nuclear deal. Sanctions, in their entirety, are to take effect no later than 180 days from the date of the NSPM.

The Office of Foreign Assets Control (OFAC) of the US Department of the Treasury, OFAC expects that all the U.S. nuclear-related sanctions lifted under the JCPOA will be re-imposed and in full effect after November 4, 2018.

The OFAC website i.e. https://www.treasury.gov/about/organizational-structure/offices/Pages/Office-of-Foreign-Assets-Control.aspx describes the regulatory organization as follows:

OFAC administers and enforces economic and trade sanctions based on US foreign policy and national security goals against targeted foreign countries and regimes, terrorists, international narcotics traffickers, those engaged in activities related to the proliferation of weapons of mass destruction, and other threats to the national security, foreign policy or economy of the United States. OFAC acts under Presidential national emergency powers, as well as authority granted by specific legislation, to impose controls on transactions and freeze assets under US jurisdiction. Many of the sanctions are based on United Nations and other international mandates, are multilateral in scope, and involve close cooperation with allied governments.

The governments of Saudi Arabia, the United Arab Emirates, Israel, and Bahrain lauded Trump’s decision to exit the nuclear deal.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu tweeted the following message praising Donald Trump’s historical decision to abandon the Iranian nuclear deal.

@netanyahu

 Israel fully supports @realDonaldTrump’s bold decision today to reject the disastrous nuclear deal with the terrorist regime in Tehran. The deal didn’t push war further away; it actually brought it closer. The deal didn’t reduce Iran’s aggression; it dramatically increased it.

(4:23 PM – May 8, 2018)

APPEASING THE MURDEROUS DRAGON

An appeaser is one who feeds a crocodile, hoping it will eat him last. – Sir Winston Churchill.

The appeasers in the aforementioned statement are the United Kingdom, France, China, Germany, Russia, – the five world powers that formed the axis along with the Barack Obama led United States, the European Union, and other nations that supported the Iranian Nuclear Deal or The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The crocodile (or murderous dragon) is the Islamic Republic of Iran.

Three years into the Iranian Nuclear Deal, the world at large seems inclined to believe that Iran, still the world’s foremost state sponsor of terrorism, has kept, and will continue to honor its commitment to deviate from a path that would lead to the acquiring of nuclear weaponry. Signers to the JCPOA agreement and other naïve onlookers cajole themselves into thinking the nuclear pact was a good thing from the outset and that naysayers were unjustifiably judgmental. Iran, they say, is proving wrong those who doubt its legitimate agenda towards industrial nuclear progress and peace with its regional neighbors and other nations around the world.

It requires only a minimal measure of perspicacity to expect the Islamic Republic of Iran, after receiving a windfall of approximately one hundred billion dollars (US) for complying, at least in the short term, with stipulations appertaining to the nuclear deal, to impress upon the negotiators of the JCPOA agreement and the world at large that it intends to honor its commitment to the accord in totality. The lifting of sanctions against Iran on January 16, 2016 released a mind-boggling sum of about $100 billion dollars (US) to the Islamic Republic. 32

Supporters of the deal who posit that initial compliance with JCPOA is any confirmation that Iran will honor a promise in its entirety as it relates to the nuclear deal must truly deceive themselves. The fact that the republic dismantled large sections of its nuclear program, as it said it would, should not be touted as proof its intention to embark on a course that diverges from a path that leads to the acquisition of nuclear weapons and continued involvement in regional and international terrorist operations.

The appeasers who would feed the crocodile in the hope they somehow manage to survive, or at the most, be devoured last, would do well to provide answers to the following flustering enquiries. It should be understood that “feeding the crocodile or dragon” may take the form of directly or indirectly aiding and abetting the Islamic Republic of Iran as it surreptitiously pursues its agenda of acquiring nuclear weaponry and attaining a position of social, political and religious ascendancy in the Middle East and other parts of the world.

Why do so many who are at loggerheads with US President Donald Trump and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, among others, refuse to acknowledge that Iran cannot be trusted to honor completely, its end of the JOCPA deal, when the following observations are true?

Since 1979, after the deposing of Iran’s late Shah Mohammad Reza Pahlavi, the Iranian Islamist regime and its Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) have been involved in sponsoring outrageous acts of terrorism resulting in the slaughter of very many innocent people. The IRGC continues to utilize its terrorist affiliate, Hezbollah, in Lebanon to produce mayhem in the Middle East region.

Are supporters of the Iranian Nuclear Deal so circumspect and guarded about criticizing or denouncing Iran for its clandestine agendas toward securing nuclear armaments and its continued implication in global terrorist activities that they fear repercussions if they anger leaders of the Islamic Republic by speaking the truth?

The National Council of Resistance of Iran (NCRI), a broad coalition of democratic Iranian organizations, groups, and individuals that comprise an inclusive and pluralistic parliament-in-exile or dissident organization, released a shocking report early in 2017 about the existence of various training camps across Iran in which foreigners receive training for terrorist activities. The report alleges the Iranian Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) operate at least 14 terrorist training camps across Iran where it trains radicals from Afghanistan, Syria, Lebanon and Yemen, countries in which Iran has political and financial interests. 33

Maryam Rajavi, the leader of The National Council of Resistance of Iran, the latter which is the premier Iranian opposition group, remarked:

The people of Iran would welcome the designation of the IRGC as a terrorist organization, which is responsible for thousands of political executions and tortures in prison. It is also responsible for training terrorists supporting and engaging in terrorist activities outside Iran.

I believe the time has come for a firm policy on Iran. The failed policy of appeasement has hurt the Iranian people, as well as global peace and security. 34

NCRI officials, in augmenting their claims about IRGC’s training of foreign terrorists, displayed satellite photographs of what it said were the camps, with names like the “Imam Ali Garrison, “the “Lowshan Garrison,” and “Badindeh Garrison.” The group said the foreign recruits learn various methods of terrorism, including training for heavy weaponry, missile launching, and learning how to use “Kalashnikovs, machine guns, mortars, tactics, sniper, among others.” At one camp, the group said recruits even learn about the “use of motorcycles for terrorist operations.” 35

NCRI leaders and other decriers of the Iranian regime have called on U.S. President Donald Trump to designate IRGC an international terrorist organization. Iran already is on the U.S. State Department’s State Sponsors of Terrorism list, along with Syria and Sudan. The IRGC emerged during the Islamic revolution in 1979, and continues to play a dominant role in Iran’s economic and security life.

Joel Rubin, who served as a deputy assistant Secretary of State in the Barack Obama administration and is the current president of the Washington Strategy Group, cautioned that designating the IRGC as a discrete terrorist group can engender calamitous consequences. In an archetypical approach that harks back to the Obama regime’s routinely gutless and mollifying reaction to Iranian indiscretions during the time Obama was president of the globe’s most powerful country, Rubin offered the following perplexing comment.

The foreign terrorist organization designation is typically reserved for foreign terrorist organizations, not for governments. We have a state sponsor of terrorism list for governments and Iran is on that list, it really does fit the bill. 36

Rubin also mentioned that portions of the IRGC are currently under U.S. sanctions, but that other nations such as Russia, China and the European countries are unlikely to take a cue from America. Rubin expressed concern that designating the IRCG a terrorist organization could jeopardize the U.S. effort against ISIS and endanger the lives of American troops in the region.

Joel Rubin’s histrionics reek of servile compliance or obsequiousness. Or is it cowardice? Or is it a mechanism set in place by a recalcitrant administration that was oblivious to the pain and suffering of countless people victimized by the world’s most notorious sponsor of terrorism, i.e. Iran? Lending credence to the preceding allusion is Iran’s unconstrained call for the total destruction of the Jewish State of Israel and the annihilation of its inhabitants.

Maryam Rajavi offers a fitting counter to Joel Rubin’s awkward statement of appeasement in her plea for stronger steps in order to effect positive changes in Tehran.

Our objective is to overthrow the dictatorship ruling Iran, which is the desire of the Iranian people. This must be done by the Iranian people and the Iranian resistance, she said. “I believe the people of Iran and our movement are capable to bring about change in Iran. 

We want the American people to know that this regime does not represent the Iranian people and the people of Iran reject this dictatorship. We want the American people to support the Iranian desire for freedom and democracy. We expect the U.S. to fairly abandon the policy of appeasement of previous administrations. 37

Why did the American administration, particularly under the inspectorate of Barack Obama, persist in turning a blind eye to the indiscretions of the Islamic Republic of Iran over the years? Ever since the 1979 Iranian hostage crisis, Iran engaged in the habitual practice of using terrorism against the United States and its allies throughout the world. Iran’s shameless collaboration with various terrorist organizations, especially Hezbollah, Hamas, the Taliban, and with militias in Iraq, Syria, Bahrain and the Gulf, among others, resulted in bombings, abductions, hijackings and murder as they targeted the U.S. and other Western nations.

The aforementioned atrocities notwithstanding, the U.S., at least before Donald Trump assumed office, exhibited a measure of leniency in its dealings with Iran that quite likely served as an impetus for the Islamic republic to persevere with its agenda of wrongdoing, including marching toward the acquisition of nuclear weaponry. The Iranian Nuclear Deal (JCPOA), with its release of close to thirty-seven billion dollars (37B) to Iran by the U.S. alone, 38 and the continued certification of the Islamic republic’s so-called adherence to JCPOA guidelines, help ensure that Iran’s furtive reach for nuclear weapons is firmly on track.

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani, just a day before U.S. President Donald Trump delivered his first address to the United Nations General Assembly in September 2017, in which the American leader unreservedly criticized the leaders of the Islamic Republic, warned that pulling back from the 2015 nuclear deal would force America to pay a “high cost. In an interview in New York, Rouhani said:

 “…exiting such an agreement (the nuclear deal) would carry a high cost for the United States of America, and I do not believe Americans would be willing to pay such a high cost for something that will be useless for them.” 39

Rouhani’s remarks were an unambiguous threat to the United States. Yet the world at large, and even some American leaders, simply glossed over the Iranian president’s diatribe and seemed oblivious to its portentous ramifications. Indeed, many leaders around the world faulted the American President Donald Trump for his persistent disavowal of the Iranian nuclear deal and his refusal to recertify the JCPOA arrangement in October 2017. Mr. Trump eventually abandoned the deal in May, 2018. The consensus of opinion was that Mr. Trump was wrong to call for a modification or revision of the deal, which he feels is unfairly tilted in favor of Iran, and Mr. Rouhani, who some observers see as honoring his obligations to the agreement, is right to be angry at Donald trump and his supporters, and even has the right to threaten the USA.

Here it was then, the leader of the world’s foremost state sponsor of international terrorism and mayhem for many decades; a nation that has earned the international community’s distrust over and over for reneging on peace agreements; issuing a clear warning to the President of the United States that if Iran cannot pursue its path to nuclear weaponry via an ill-advised and flawed international nuclear deal, the consequences would be very costly.

Only a pathetically indiscernible soul would be inclined to think Mr. Rouhani’s mention of “high cost” referred to sanctions and/or boycotts, and not military attacks. The world, including many American leaders, continues to play a dangerous game in trying to appease Iran, the murderous dragon.

 

 Notes:

 

  1. The P5+1 are also sometimes referred to as the “E3+3” (for the “EU three” countries (France, the UK, and Germany) plus the three non-EU countries (the U.S., Russia, and China)). The terms are interchangeable. This article uses the “P5+1” phrase.
  2. Karl Vick, Washington Post Foreign Service, Thursday, December 15, 2005. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/12/14/AR2005121402403.html
  3. World Israel News – Israel Slams Abbas for Anti-Semitic, Holocaust-denying Speech, January 15, 2018. https://worldisraelnews.com/israel-slams-abbas-for-anti-semitic-holocaust-denying-speech/.
  4. United States Department of State, List of Sponsors of Terrorism – http://www.state/j/ct/rls/crt/2013/224826.htm
  5. United States Department of State, List of Sponsors of Terrorism – http://www.state/j/ct/rls/crt/2013/224826.htm
  6. United States Department of State, List of Sponsors of Terrorism – http://www.state/j/ct/rls/crt/2013/224826.htm
  7. Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Leader of Iran, February 2012, World Net Daily, Alef website
  8. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, August 17, 2012 – Agence France Presse
  9. Sayyid Ali Khamenei, Leader of Iran, February 2012, World Net Daily, Alef website
  10. Brigadier General Amir Ali Hajizadeh, Commander of the Aero-Space Forces of the Islamic Revolution Guards Corps., August 18, 2012 – The Jerusalem Post
  11. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, August 2, 2012 – The Jerusalem Post
  12. Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, President of Iran, August 17, 2012 – Jerusalem Issue Brief: Iran Ramps Up Genocidal Rhetoric
  13. Israel 101 – www.standwithus.com Christians United for Israel, pg. 2
  14. Statistics derived from Mitchell Bard, Myths & Facts: A Guide to the Arab-Israeli Conflict, 2001. pp. 192-198
  15. Iran’s Supreme Leader Screams ‘Death to America’ Amid Ongoing Nuclear Talks – New York Post. By Joe Tacopino, March 23, 2015 https://nypost.com/2015/03/23/irans-supreme-leader-screams-death-to-america-amid-ongoing-nuclear-talks/
  16. CBN News, Christian World News: April 12, 2013 http://www1.cbn.com/video/christian-world-news/2013/4/12/christian-world-news-april-12-2013
  17. Unprecedented Christian Persecution in Iran: UN Report. By Meira Svirsky, Sunday, March 23, 2014 – Clarion Project. https://clarionproject.org/unprecedented-christian-persecution-iran-un-report/
  18. Christians persecuted at alarming rate in Iran, Arab world, US report says – By Benjamin Weinthal Published May 11, 2014,  Fox News http://www.foxnews.com/world/2014/05/11/us-panels-report-documents-christians-under-siege-in-arab-world.html
  19. Freedom Declared – The All-Party Parliamentary Group for International Freedom of Religion or Belief and Christians in Parliament All-Party Parliamentary Group https://academic.oup.com/jcs/article-abstract/57/3/597/832261
  20. © 2018 All Party Parliamentary Group on International Freedom of Religion or Belief. The Persecution of Christians in Iran: Report Launched March 10, 2015 https://appgfreedomofreligionorbelief.org/the-persecution-of-christians-in-iran-report-launched/
  21. UN Report Blasts Iran for Persecution of Christians, Other Religious Minorities. By Benjamin Weinthal – Published March 21, 2014 – Fox News (Fox News World)
  22. Iran Lied About Its Nuclear Program. What Is the United States Going to Do About It? Author: William H. Tobey | December 3, 2015https://www.belfercenter.org/publication/iran-lied-about-its-nuclear-program-what-united-states-going-do-about-it
  23. Saudi Nuclear Weapons ‘on order’ from Pakistan – Mark Urban. Diplomatic and Defence editor, Newsnight @MarkUrban01 on Twitter 6 November 2013. http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-24823846
  24. Arutz Sheva – Israel NationalNews.com – Reuters – Spotlight: Contact Editor Tova Dvorin, 29/01/14 18:08
  25. United Institute of Peace – http//iranprimer.usip.org/resource/irans-ballistic-missile-program
  26. USA Today, March 9, 2016, Jane Oyanga-Omara
  27. Homeland Security Newswire: German Intelligence: Iran Still Seeking Illicit Nuclear Technology http://www.homelandsecuritynewswire.com/dr20170712-german-intelligence-iran-still-seeking-illicit-nuclear-technology
  28. Iran Says It Will ‘Firmly Respond’ if Obama Doesn’t Stop Extension of Sanctions – By Rebecca Savransky – The Hill. 12/04/16 http://thehill.com/policy/national-security/308662-iran-says-it-will-firmly-respond-if-obama-doesnt-stop-extension-of-
  29. WORLD NEWS, JULY 18, 2017, U.S. Puts New Sanctions on Iran over Ballistic Missile Program -Mohammad Zargham, Steve Holland
  30. WORLD NEWS, JULY 18, 2017, U.S. Puts New Sanctions on Iran over Ballistic Missile Program -Mohammad Zargham, Steve Holland
  31. US Waives Iran Sanctions Amid Continuing Assessment of JCPOA Sputnik News – In-Depth Coverage 14.09.2017 https://www.globalsecurity.org/wmd/library/news/iran/2017/iran-170914-sputnik01.htm
  32. David E. Sanger, The New York Times, June 16, 2016
  33. Fox News Politics, Eric Shawn, Ben Evansky 2/15/2017. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/15/opposition-group-claims-iran-sponsoring-new-terror-training-camps.html
  34. Maryam Rajavi: The People of Iran Would Welcome Designation of the IRGC. 15, 2018.  2018 Maryam Rajavi – Interviews https://www.maryam-rajavi.com/en/activities/interviews
  35. Fox News Politics, Eric Shawn, Ben Evansky, 2/15/2017. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/15/opposition-group-claims-iran-sponsoring-new-terror-training-camps.html
  36. Fox News – Opposition Group Claims Iran Sponsoring New Terror Training Camps – By Eric Shawn. Published:  February 15, 2017   http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/15/opposition-group-claims-iran-sponsoring-new-terror-training-camps.html
  37. Fox News Politics, Eric Shawn, Ben Evansky, 2/15/2017. Opposition Group Claims Iran Sponsoring New Terror Training Camps. http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2017/02/15/opposition-group-claims-iran-sponsoring-new-terror-training-camps.html
  38. The Washington Free Beacon, Adam Kredo, September 8, 2017. Iran May Have Received as Much as $33.6 Billion in Cash, Gold Payments From U.S. http://freebeacon.com/national-security/iran-may-received-much-33-6-billion-cash-gold-payments-u-s/
  39. Clark Mindsock, Independent News. September 19, 2017 http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/americas/us-politics/trump-iran-un-speech-murderous-regime-saudi-arabia-latest-a7955641.html

1 comment to ANALYZING THE PREPOSTEROUS IRANIAN NUCLEAR DEAL



Enter your email address:

Delivered by FeedBurner