Iran hardliners lay out conditions for deal talks

Share

While stressing that normalization of economic and trade relations with Tehran requires a central element of the agreement, she also voiced the bloc's regrets of the US' move.

Supporters of Trump's rip-it-up strategy may not have meant to bring us closer to military confrontation, but the effect of proceeding in this fashion without a reasonable method of obtaining a better result than the JCPOA (Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action) will most certainly move us toward either conflict or acquiescence to Iran's emergence as a nuclear power.

The United States threatened on Sunday to impose sanctions on European companies that do business with Iran, as the remaining participants in the Iran nuclear accord stiffened their resolve to keep that agreement operational.

Susan Rice, former national security adviser of Obama and United States ambassador to the UN, warned that U.S. withdrawal "will not force Iran back to the negotiating table... but will leave Iran's nuclear program unconstrained, and an inconstant America isolated from its allies and far less safe".

The European Commission has been examining measures to counter the introduction of any USA sanctions that could harm European businesses.

America's top diplomat said Sunday that Washington still wants to work with Europe to counter Iran's "malign behavior", and was working hard to thrash out a more wide-ranging deal with its European partners.

On April 2, the talks came to a conclusion and a news conference was held to announce that the eight parties had reached an agreement on a framework deal.

Bolton in the past has suggested the US government should push for a change in government in Iran.

President Barack Obama said the only alternative to the weak-kneed deal was war, and some Trump critics have said his abandonment of the deal could send Iran scurrying to get its nukes, something that would now take about a year as compared to maybe three months before the deal.

It's true that European powers tried to save the JCPOA by proposing a package that addressed Trump's concerns about the agreement.

Iran has been moving ahead to build nuclear weapons.

They include retaliatory sanctions, allowing the European Investment Bank to invest directly in Iran and coordinating euro-denominated credit lines from European governments.

Several Iranian officials told Reuters that as long as Iran could sell its oil and get its money, the deal remained alive. Major European companies could see billions of dollars in commercial deals canceled because of the United States decision to re-impose sanctions. The European Union is also making a move to block the possibility of United States sanctions against European companies. The truthful question they were presenting was: Should we pull out of a flawed deal without going through all the downstream consequences, and without a complete understanding with allies as to next steps? It is clear the USA president feels strongly about the Iran issue claiming the agreement is "a great embarrassment" and "a giant fiction given that "we can not prevent an Iranian nuclear bomb under the decaying, rotten structure of the current agreement".

I wonder why they're still treating him with kid gloves?

Already, many European countries and others are also protesting the U.

Share