Why China has a deep mistrust of America - GulfToday

Why China has a deep mistrust of America

Iran

Demonstrators chant slogans during a rally in front of the former US Embassy commemorating the anniversary of its 1979 seizure in Tehran, Iran. Associated Press

US President Joe Biden has pledged that if Washington returns to the 2015 nuclear deal with Tehran, the US would only withdraw once again if Iran violates the terms of the agreement. This commitment meets Iran’s demand that the US will not, once again, abandon the deal as it did in 2018 under Donald Trump.

Biden made this commitment in a joint statement with Germany’s Chancellor Angela Merkel, French President Emmanuel Macron, and British Prime Minister Boris Johnson at the G20 summit in Italy.

The key paragraph of the statement read: “We welcome President Biden’s clearly demonstrated commitment to return the US to full compliance with the (deal) and to stay in full compliance, so long as Iran does the same.” This pledge was welcomed by Mikhail Ulyanov, the Russian ambassador to the European Union-sponsored Vienna talks on returning the US to the pact and Iran to compliance with its provisions. These talks were suspended in June due to the Iranian presidential election and have not resumed because the winner, hardliner Ebrahim Raisi has refused to return until he decides Iran is ready — which will be sometime this month, according to Iranian spokesmen.

Biden has clearly come under pressure from the three European governments to re-enter the nuclear deal which he had pledged to do during his 2020 election campaign. However, since taking office in January, Biden has not honoured this promise and has complicated the situation by demanding Iran end its involvement in regional affairs and halt its ballistic missile programme. Iran argues these are separate issues and has refused to meet these demands. On this issue, nothing was said in the G20 statement, indicating that Germany, France and Britain agree with Iran.

Meanwhile, the Biden administration has attempted to shed the blame for the building crisis over the deal under which Iran accepted limits to its nuclear programme in exchange for lifting punitive economic sanctions. Although Biden blames Trump for pulling out, his spokesman claim that it is not clear whether Iran is “serious” about returning to compliance.

After Trump abandoned the deal and began to impose 1,500 sanctions, Iran waited for more than a year for the other signatories to the deal — France, Germany, Britain, China, and Russia — to deliver sanctions relief and meet the other terms of the deal. This did not happen because the US has a chokehold on international finance and banking and threatened to sanction any government, business, or individual involved in commerce with Iran. In 2019, Iran began to gradually breach the limits set by the deal for uranium enrichment, introducing banned advanced centrifuges, and curbing inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Iran contends that its actions are in line with the terms of the nuclear deal which allows Iran to breach its terms if one or more signatories do not meet their obligations.

Fed up with Biden’s procrastination and prevarication, Merkel, Macron and Johnson clearly told him to meet Iran’s demands and re-enter the deal. They and the Iranians expected Biden to honour his verbal campaign commitment to return the US to the deal along with other key international agreements from which Trump withdrew. Biden quickly signed an executive order to rejoin the Paris climate accord but only agreed to hold talks on the Iran agreement.

Biden listened to the ignorant advice of appointees who believed the US could bully Iran into major concessions on its involvement in the affairs of the region and weapons development in exchange for US re-entry and some but not all sanctions relief. To make matters worse, the Biden administration has slapped fresh sanctions on Iran and anyone dealing with Iran, convincing Tehran that Biden was simply following Trump’s failed policy of “maximum pressure” which, in fact he has been. This has deepened Iran’s mistrust of Washington and the Western signatories of the deal.

Iran did not budge and demanded that the US rejoin the deal before Iran would begin returning to compliance by reverting to low-level uranium enrichment, exporting its stockpile of enriched material, warehousing advanced centrifuges for purifying uranium, and granting UN monitors the full range of inspections laid down in the agreement.

Biden failed to see that since the concessions he was demanding were not granted while Iran’s moderate President Hassan Rouhani was in office, they were not likely to be accepted by any successor, moderate or hardline. If Biden had re-entered the deal promptly, a moderate might have been elected president in the June poll. Instead, conservative hardliner Ebrahim Raisi triumphed. He has repeatedly said he seeks to return to the deal but Biden still hesitates.

In response, Iranian foreign minister Hossein Amir-Abdollahian has said there is no need for negotiations and the solution is for Biden to issue an executive order saying he was returning to the nuclear deal and lifting the sanctions imposed by Trump. Iran would then return to compliance.

Tehran believes it is in a strong position for several reasons. Opinion polls in Iran show that the US is highly unpopular with the populace which blames the US for the country’s economic woes and the lack of medical supplies and other essential goods. Iran has focused on rebuilding its economy, expanding its involvement in regional affairs, and developing its missile and drone programmes. Instead of waiting for the remaining signatories of the Iran nuclear deal to deliver sanctions relief, Tehran has pivoted East and made a major 25-year agreement for the sale of its oil to China in exchange for investment.

Iran also counts on countries fed up with US sanctions to evade US sanctions by buying oil and engaging in trade. On the diplomatic plane, Tehran has conducted several rounds of reconciliation talks with Riyadh, a major US ally, with the aim of ending the rivalry between Shia Iran and Sunni Saudi Arabia. If successful, the rapprochement could contribute to the stabilisation of the region at a time the US is focusing on containing China.

Related articles

Majority of US voters support the deal with Iran

US presidential candidate Joe Biden promised to return to the 2015 agreement limiting Iran’s nuclear programme in exchange for lifting sanctions. Instead, President Biden sticks to the dangerous and destructive policy dictated by Donald Trump who withdrew from the deal in 2018 and slapped 1,500 punitive sanctions on Iran.

Biden hesitates although 54 per cent of registered US voters support a deal while only 20 per cent oppose; among Biden’s Democrats the number is 70 per cent backers and six per cent opponents; among independents 50 per cent support and 30 per cent do not; and 41 per cent of Republicans are in favour against 35 who are not.

Since Biden’s own positive rating is currently a low 41 per cent against 56 per cent negative rating, it would seem it would behove him to re-enter the deal. The main obstacle is Tehran’s insistence that the US must lift Trump’s designation of Iran’s Revolutionary Guard (IRG) as a “foreign terrorist organisation,” making the IRG the world’s sole national army to join a host of armed non-state actors.

The text, a somewhat amended version of the original document, has been ready for months and awaits finalisation. Why then is Biden procrastinating and prevaricating? He faces stiff opposition from domestic anti-Iran lobbyists and legislators and Israel where the government rejects the deal. In both countries military and intelligence experts are, however, in favour. They hold, correctly, that Tehran has made great strides in developing both nuclear expertise and output since Trump pulled out, prompting Iran to gradually reduce its adherence in retaliation.

Instead of being limited to 3.67 uranium enrichment Iran has 43 kilograms of 60 per cent enriched uranium: this is a few steps away from the 90 per cent needed for a bomb. Instead of having a 300 kilogram stockpile of 3.67 enriched uranium, Iran has a stock 18 times larger of uranium enriched above the 3.67 per cent level permitted. Instead of carrying out enrichment with old, approved centrifuges, Iran has employed advanced centrifuges.

Instead of abiding by the stringent monitoring regime put in place by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), Iran has been slipping surveillance. Until Iran began to breach the regulatory regime, it was the toughest on earth.

Nevertheless, Iran has pledged to revert to the deal once the US re-enters and to halt enrichment above 3.67 per cent, export all but 300 kilogrammes of the permitted 3.67 per cent of material in its stockpile, revert to old centrifuges which have been warehoused, and re-engage fully with the IAEA monitoring effort.

Opponents of the deal argue its “sunset clauses” will expire by 2031, thereby ending restrictions on Iran’s nuclear activities. This may be addressed in the new deal.

However, they also contend it fails to curb in Iran’s ballistic missile programme and sup- port for Lebanon’s Hizbollah, Yemeni Houthi rebels, Iraqi Shia militias and the Syrian government.

Since these issues are outside the purview of the 2015 deal, Iran rightly rejects including them in its successor. Tehran has also made it clear that they can be discussed directly with the US once Biden re-joins the deal and sanctions are lifted.

After months of trying to get the external issues incorporated into the nuclear deal, the Biden administration conceded that this is impossible.

On April 29th this year, Secretary of State Antony Blinken told lawmakers that the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign had failed and “produced a more dangerous nuclear programme” while Iran stepped up involvement in regional affairs. These post-Ukraine war remarks suggested that the Biden administration was ready to return to the deal.

However, the administration continues to blow hot at one moment and cold another. Last week Washington may have blown up the deal. At the 35-member IAEA board of governors meeting in Vienna the US — along with acolytes Britain, France, and Germany — secured the adoption of a resolution critical of Iran over its inability or refusal to account for traces of nuclear material at three undeclared sites found by IAEA monitors in 2019 and 2020.

The resolution, which received 30 votes in favour — with Iran and Russia voting against and India, China and Libya abstaining — urges Iran to co-operate “without delay” with inspectors after IAEA director Rafael Grossi reported he had not received a “technically credible” explanation for the presence of particles.

Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi pointed out that uranium “contamination” was possible “in a country as vast as Iran.” He also suggested “human sabotage” by Israel which is blamed for repeated attacks on Iranian nuclear sites and assassinations of Iranian scientists.

Iranian officials are suspicious due to the fact that former Israeli Prime Minister Bin- yamin Netanyahu instigated visits by IAEA inspectors to one of the three contaminate sites at the village of Turquzabad near Tehran. IAEA monitors took soil samples and concluded that there were “traces of radioactive material” at the location which may have been used for storage as there were no signs of processing. How did Netanyahu know there were samples at this site?

Although the IAEA still has more than 40 cameras which will continue to operate at Iran’s enrichment facilities, Grossi stated Tehran’s action mounted to a “serious challenge.” He warned that in three or four weeks the agency would be unable to provide “continuity of knowledge” about Iran’s activities. “This could be a fatal blow” to negotiations over the nuclear deal, he stated.

He also warned that Iran is “just a few weeks” away from having enough enriched uranium to build a nuclear bomb. However, Iran halted work on weaponisation in 2003 and supreme leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei has repeatedly stated that Iran will not manufacture nuclear weapons as they are prohibited by Islam.

Kelsey Davenport of the “independent” Washington-based Arms Control Association told the BBC that in ten days or less Iran could transform its current stock of 60 per cent enriched uranium into the 90 per cent required for weapons. She said, however, that manufacturing bombs would require one or two years.

If Biden continues dithering the deal could die, further destabilising an already unstable region.

Michael Jansen, Political Correspondent

12 Jun 2022