by Oui
Mon May 5th, 2025 at 01:42:36 PM EST
NSC Advisor Waltz Went Rogue On Iran
.
Sen. Banks at Elbridge Colby Hearing -- Full Questioning
Signed by Barack Obama in 2015 ...
Then-Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi (Center-R) and Helga Schmid (Center-L), secretary general of the European Union's External Action Service (EEAS), take part in a meeting of the Joint Commission of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) attended by the E3+2 (China, France, Germany, Russia, United Kingdom) and Iran on July 28, 2019, at the Palais Coburg in Vienna, Austria. (Photo Alex Halada/AFP)
'JCPOA 2': New US-Iran nuke deal said shaping up as largely similar to one Trump ended | TOI |
Agreement being negotiated `preserves the core' of 2015 deal, sources say; may impose constraints on uranium enrichment but not dismantle nuclear facilities or address Iran's ballistic missiles
Under the terms being discussed, Iran would limit stockpile size and centrifuge types, and dilute, export or seal its 60 percent uranium stock under unprecedented International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) scrutiny, all in exchange for substantial sanctions relief, all the sources said.
The US State Department, Iran's foreign ministry and Netanyahu's office did not respond to requests for comment.
Netanyahu is demanding "zero enrichment" and a Libya-style deal that dismantles Iran's nuclear infrastructure.
Iran says its right to enrich is not negotiable. However, the size of the uranium stockpile, shipping stocks out of the country, and the number of centrifuges are under discussion, three Iranian officials said.
Under proposals discussed in rounds of talks in April, Iran would cap enrichment at 3.67%, in line with the JCPOA, all the sources said, including three Iranian officials. Tehran is also open to granting the IAEA expanded access to its nuclear sites, the Iranian sources said.
The proposals do not seek to dismantle Tehran's nuclear infrastructure entirely as Israel and some US officials want, but aim to lock in permanent constraints on uranium enrichment that deter any breakout, the sources said.
US Middle East envoy Steve Witkoff appeared to acknowledge that position in comments last week, but later said Iran must "stop and eliminate" enrichment.
Stalemate in the UN Security Council. A New "Cold War" with Iran? | by verchenceto on Mar 29th, 2006 |
In September 2002 the administration of United States President George W. Bush outlined a radically new foreign policy. Known as the Bush doctrine, it sought to prevent other nations from obtaining weapons of mass destruction by adopting a policy of pre-emptive war (striking first). It also announced that the United States would maintain unquestioned military supremacy by not allowing any other nation to emerge as a potential military rival.
The Bush doctrine removed two key pillars that held U.S. foreign policy in place for more than 50 years: the policy of deterrence, which sought to prevent a nuclear attack by threatening massive retaliation and the policy of containment, which held that U.S. military forces needed only to be strong enough to contain any aggressor. Critics characterized the new stance as an arrogant statement of power that threatened to alienate world opinion and jeopardize the role of international institutions such as the United Nations (UN).
Iran's nuclear energy program has proved controversial in recent years. Some international critics say that Iran does not need nuclear energy in view of its vast oil and gas reserves. Iran responds by saying that Western opposition to its nuclear energy program is politically-motivated, since there was no opposition to the Bushehr nuclear power plant project when it started before the 1979 revolution with German involvement. Iran also maintains that if it can use nuclear power to meet some of its domestic energy needs, it will be able to export more oil and generate more foreign currency revenue.
The Bush Doctrine and U.S. Intervention | American Diplomacy Columbia University - Q2 2004 |
Bush's moral simplicity has helped him ease the American transition from the targeted war on international terrorist networks to the much broader confrontation with what he calls the 'axis of evil' and other so-called 'evildoers.'
The Bush administration's assertion of a right to flex its offensive military muscle against so-called rogue states via pre-emptive force and preventive war is both a political response to the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, and consistent with the history of active U.S. interventionism. But while offensive force is certainly not a new development or concept, its expression in the form of a very public national security doctrine and the President's claim of a moral right to pre-empt or prevent threats is a highly expansive interpretation of that history.
Since the early years of the Republic, there has been a crusading missionary component to America's existence: namely, to tell the world about the success of the American experiment and to extend to others the benefit of its wisdom. For Thomas Paine, America was "an asylum for mankind" and John Winthrop once spoke of a shining "city on a hill," words which later formed the basis of Manifest Destiny and American exceptionalism.
Khamenei, JCPOA Partners and NPT
