Friday, August 21, 2015

The IAEA Secret Side Deal Favors Iran

Even as GOP Senate Majority Leader Mitch McConnell was telling an audience that it would be very difficult to stop President Obama's Iran nuclear deal, saying, "We'll see," Republicans expressed outrage at the report of a bargain between the UN atomic watchdog International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Iran that lets Teheran use its own inspectors to investigate a site suspected of developing nuclear arms. IAEA Director-General Yukiya Amano said he is disturbed by statements suggesting that the IAEA has given responsibility for nuclear inspections to Iran : "Such statements misrepresent the way in which we will undertake this important verification work." Amano's statement was unusually strong. Under a secret roadmap accord Iran reached with the IAEA alongside the July 14 P5+1 agreement, Iran is required to give the IAEA enough information about its past nuclear program to allow the watchdog to write a report on the issue by year-end. The secret agreement that the Associated Press says it saw and verified (see below), concerns the Parchin facility and is regarded by critics of the P5+1 nuclear deal as another proof of their argument that the deal doesn’t do enough to curb Teheran’s nuclear ambitions. Senate Majority Whip John Cornyn said in a statement : "Trusting Iran to inspect its own nuclear site and report to the UN in an open and transparent way is remarkably naive and incredibly reckless. This revelation only reinforces the deep-seated concerns the American people have about the agreement." House Foreign Affairs Committee chair Ed Royce said : “International inspections should be done by international inspectors. Period. The standard of 'anywhere, anytime' inspections -- so critical to a viable agreement -- has dropped to ‘when Iran wants, where Iran wants, on Iran’s terms." Republican presidential candidates also hammered the revelation. Senator Lindsey Graham, who chairs the Senate Appropriations subpanel that funds US international efforts, repeated his previous vow to block funding for the IAEA until Congress gets access to the agency’s so-called “side deals” with Iran. Former Florida Governor Jeb Bush tweeted : “Iran deal is a farce. Nuclear inspections of state sponsors of terrorism can’t work on the honor system.” ~~~~~ The existence of “side deals” between the IAEA and Iran, not revealed by Obama until their existence had been publicly exposed, has become a major rallying point for Iran deal opponents, mainly congressional Republicans, who are encouraging Democrats to join them in overriding an expected Obama veto. The Parchin side deal was negotiated exclusively between the IAEA and Iran. The US and the five other Western powers that negotiated the broader nuclear accord were only briefed on it by the IAEA and Amano, who visited Capitol Hill early in August, told lawmakers he could not share with them the confidential bargain, reportedly labeled “secret arrangement II,” The Parchin installation is believed to have been used by Iran’s military as a site to develop nuclear weapons and associated technology before 2005. But, Teheran has stonewalled any IAEA examination of the facility and now has apparently convinced the IAEA to let it self-inspect the site and collect samples without IAEA supervision or presence. Critics of the P5+1 nuclear deal argue that the side bargain relieves Iran of any pressure or mechanism to force it to give details of its past work at Parchin, allowing Iran to conceal just how far along its weapons effort truly is. ~~~~~ On Wednesday, the Obama administration, which hasn't seen the IAEA-Iran agreement, rejected concerns that the IAEA wouldn’t be able to investigate Iran’s alleged attempts to build a nuclear weapon. National Security Council spokesman Ned Price said in a statement : "We are confident in the agency's technical plans for investigating the possible military dimensions of Iran's former program. Just as importantly, the IAEA is comfortable with arrangements, which are unique to the agency's investigation of Iran's historical activities.” But, the disclosure comes as a setback for the White House as it tries to gain support for the Iran deal. On Tuesday, Senator Robert Menendez became the second senior Senate Democrat to announce that he will vote against the agreement, joining Senator Charles Schumer and the entire Republican caucus, in opposition. But, following Menendez’s announcement, Rhode Island Democrat Senators Sheldon Whitehouse and Jack Reed, the ranking member on the Senate Armed Services Committee, said they would support the deal. On Wednesday, Senator Joe Donnelly, another Armed Services Committee member, and Senator Ed Markey, who sits on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, took Obama's number of supporters to 25. Donnelly said : “While I share the concerns expressed by the agreement’s critics about what may happen 10, 15, or 20 years from now, I cannot in good conscience take action that would shift the potential risks of 2026 and 2031 to 2016. With or without this deal, the day may come when we are left with no alternative but to take military action to prevent Iran from crossing the nuclear threshold...I owe it to the men and women of our Armed Forces and to the people of Indiana to have exhausted every other option to stop Iran before we would consider putting any of our service members in harm’s way." ~~~~~ With Senator Menendez opposing the deal, Republicans only need four more Democrats to reach a filibuster-proof majority of 60 and deliver a bipartisan rebuke to the President. In the House, the 246 Republicans have more than the needed simple majority of 218, including the support of 12 Democrats. But even if Congress votes to reject the deal, President Obama could veto it and force Congress to find a two-thirds majority to override his veto. That would require 7 more Senate Democrats and 32 House Democrats. Even critics of the deal believe it will be tough to reach the two-thirds needed. Nevertheless, GOP congressional opponents of the deal see the initial rejection as a chance to build momentum against it, and raise public support for a renegotiation. Emily Landau, head of the arms control program at the Institute for National Security Studies at Tel Aviv University, who opposes the deal and is in Washington this week to brief staffers of those still undecided, says : "I think it could spark a renegotiation....that's the reason to go for it, to say to the administration, 'We're not satisfied with this, go back to the negotiating table and bring us a better deal.’" A rejection would also make it easier for the next President to discard the deal, she said. ~~~~~ But for now, the goal is to find four more Senate Democrats to vote against the deal. They would be defying the President and facing backlash from progressive groups and Democratic voters who support the deal -- who are betting that Iran will cooperate with the deal, at least until their next election. The decision could be “possibly career-ending,” American Enterprise Institute defense and security policy analyst Thomas Donnelly says. There are 19 Senate Democrats still undecided, according to The Hill's whip list. Senate Democrats who are facing reelection in 2016 and are still undecided on the deal include Senators Michael Bennet (Colo.), Richard Blumenthal (Conn.), Barbara Mikulski (Md.), Patty Murray (Wash.), and Ron Wyden (Ore). Anti-deal groups are targeting those they see as most undecided, including Senators Blumenthal, Cory Booker (N.J.), and Bennet, who is the most vulnerable of the Democrats facing reelection next year. Anti-deal groups are also targeting Senator Ben Cardin (D-Md.), ranking member of the Foreign Relations Committee, and Senator Joe Manchin (D-W.Va.). When members return to Washington in September, the Jewish-American AIPAC is planning a lobbying blitz, bringing as many as 800 members to Washington to lobby against the deal. Landau says she believes the administration is not acting entirely confident : "When I see how the administration is reacting to the criticism, I get the sense that the administration feels pressured...maybe because they assess that the issue is not clear cut and they [don't] have the support." ~~~~~ Dear readers, the AP was allowed to transcribe the IAEA-Iran Parchin side agreement. Officials verified that the AP transcription is the same as the final agreement. You may read it by clicking on the URL below. It is clear that Iran will collect Parchin samples, take photos and videos and then invite the IAEA Director for a guided visit. Again, Obama has failed, and Iran has won another major concession. It is time to stop this farce. Instead of worrying about their own reelection, Democrats should be worrying about being responsible for exposing American soldiers to a nuclear war when Iran decides to use its nuclear bomb provided by Kerry and Obama. ~~~ http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/wireStory/text-draft-agreement-iaea-iran-33212862

3 comments:

  1. If anyone believes anything coming from Obama, Kerry, or any other administration officials, or any associated deal made by any internternational body concerning this nuclear treaty contact me I have a bridge in New York City I'll sell at a bargain basement price.

    How many times does the man from Chicago think we'll go along with is lies.

    Obama and Kerry have known of the "secret" deal from day one.

    ReplyDelete
  2. The nuclear deal with Iran seems to get worse by the day. Will the secret side deals, Iran’s collecting of its own nuclear samples, a rigged collection process, and Iranian threats to silence the head of the IAEA be enough to convince Congress to reject the terrible nuclear agreement with Iran?

    The simple idea that Iran can or would be honest in its policing and reporting on the nuclear program in Iran is ti to also think it would be sensibly to have an (American) National Football League player mail in his own urine samples for drug testing under the in place Drug Policy of the NFL.

    This whole scenario is just plain comical of Iran with Nukes does can be at all humorous, of which it can’t.

    ReplyDelete
  3. "abandon hope all ye who enter here" - Dante Inferno

    Is this what Washington DC has become, a place where all possible hope for doing the right thing no matter the political alignment is out of reach? A place where political consideration is paramount to what is best for the citizens.

    Has the seat of our government become a collection of spineless officials who find comfort in party politics verses people politics?

    The Iranian nuclear weapons treaty is a bad agreement, bad for the Middle East, bad for Israel, bad for Europe, and down the road a few years bad for the entire world.

    Add to this 'bad agreement' at least 2 "secret side agreements"that we the citizens and most of Congress will not be knowledgeable to the contents, and we have a recipe for disaster. A disaster that was easily avoidable if some elected members of Congress but responsibility before party politics.

    ReplyDelete