25 January 2016By Amir Taheri
At the end of a week dominated by news of the ''historic deal'' over Iran's
nuclear program, a few points are clear. The first is that world public
opinion was keen to kick that can down the road. The mood is that the world
has enough on its plates to not want another crisis that involves the image of
the mushroom cloud.
The second point is that both the Obama faction in Washington and its partner
the Rafsanjani faction in Tehran were desperate to conjure up something,
anything, and they did. Obama is preparing his legacy in his copyrighted
window-dressing style. The Rafsanjani faction hopes that the ''deal'' will boost
its position in next month's elections.
The third point is that the ''deal'' is not what its promoters claim. The whole
thing was negotiated by Iran and a beast known as P5+1+EU which has no legal
existence and no authority to negotiate. This is why after almost two years of
negotiations neither side signed anything. The 179 Joint Comprehensive Plan of
Action (JCPOA) is not legally binding on anyone and was described by Iran's
Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi as nothing but ''a list of voluntary
measures''.
Iran's President Hassan Rouhani claims that the ''deal'', known in Persian as
Barjam, has led to the lifting of all sanctions against his Islamic Republic.
This is patently untrue. Here is how Araqchi puts it: ''We have to accept the
fact that not all sanctions will be removed. Only sanctions related to the
nuclear issue will be suspended''.
Over the past 36 years Iran has become subject to, or victim of, six sets of
sanctions related to a range of issues from hostage-taking and terrorism to
the violation of human rights and, of course, cheating on the Nuclear
Nonproliferation Treaty.
These sanctions are targeted in different ways at the Iranian government,
Iranian private companies and banks and even individual citizens. Only five
per cent of all sanctions are directly related to the nuclear issue and thus
covered by the ''deal''. At least 45 per cent have nothing do with nuclear
issues and will in no way be affected by the ''deal.'' Another 35 per cent are
categorized as ''hybrid'', meaning they deal with dual-aspect issues where a
nuclear-military angle may also be involved. Finally, 15 per cent of the
sanctions are subject to legal disputes over their definition. Iran argues
they must be covered by the ''deal'' while the P5+1+EU claim that other issues
are involved.
Even if we add the ''hybrids'', we may envisage action on just 40 per cent of
the sanctions. But even then there is no question of ''cancelling'' or lifting
the sanctions as Rouhani and his ''New York Boys'' claim.
To avoid straight lies, Rouhani and his entourage have avoided all the six
Persian words that could describe ''cancellation'', ''annulment'' or ''lifting'' of
sanctions. Instead, they have used ambiguous words that give the impression
that sanctions have been lifted without, however, saying so directly. Here are
some of those words ''barchideh'' (rolled up), ''forurikhteh'' (collapsed), and
''pasa-tahrim'' (post sanction).
The ''deal'' is for a period of 10 years that could be reduced to eight, if
things go well. However, aspects of it are for 15 to 25 years and, in some
cases, left vague which could mean forever. During those eight to 10 years,
sanctions related to the nuclear issue could be suspended, not cancelled. In
other words the Sword of Damocles will remain suspended over Iran's head. Once
the eight or 10 years period is completed the P5+1+EU could declare that
Tehran has carried out all its ''voluntary obligations''. Only then, the process
of lifting sanctions could begin by referring them to the legislative organs
of the countries concerned.
As a sweetener, under Article 23 of the CJPOA and 21 of its addendum, Obama
has promised to ''work closely'' with the US Congress to have the sanctions
lifted. Since Obama will be around for just another year, that promise is
little more than fools' gold. In the meantime, the US and EU partners can
suspend sanctions.
Obama can do that with Executive Orders for consecutive periods of 90, 120 and
180 days and has already done so in a number of domains. As for the EU the
length of ''suspension'' is decided by Brussels at the suggestion of any member.
What Iran has secured is limited sanctions relief.
This is welcome because it allows Iran to start using some of its own money
for urgent needs such as paying the arrears of salaries of teachers, oil
workers and, in some cases, even the military. Iran will also be able to start
negotiations with countries, such as China, India, Japan and Brazil that owe
it money for the oil they have bought but have so far refused to pay by
claiming they were applying UN sanctions. With the suspension of sanctions
Iran could also try to regain at least part of the oil market share it has
lost.
The ''deal'' has another advantage for Iran: it softens its image as a rogue
state and opens up the possibility of its eventual removal from the list of
states sponsoring terrorism. However, to spend its own money, Iran has had to
accept a humiliating arrangement that puts a good chunk of its economy under
effective supervision (droit-de-regard in French diplomatic language) by the
P5+1+EU group.
Frozen assets are released in tranches fixed by the so-called ''implementation
committee''. This consists of the United States, Russia, China, Britain,
France, Germany and the EU. (Araqchi is Iran's man in the committee.) To take
a decision, including snapping sanctions back into place or de-freezing a new
tranche of Iranian money, the committee needs at least five votes.
It must also make sure that Iran will not spend the released money on
financing terrorist groups or foreign adventures.
Using a trick known as ''dual-use concerns'', the committee gains a right of
veto on part of Iranian trade and industrial development. Any scheme suspected
of having dual civilian and military, nuclear-related, uses could be vetoed.
Even if Russia and China who are regarded as sympathetic to Tehran break ranks
with the US and its allies, they wouldn't have enough votes to loosen the
tutelage imposed on Iran.
Iran is not alone in having received considerably less, and given considerably
more, than Rouhani and his ''New York Boys'' claim. Obama, too, has been
economical with the truth. The ''deal'' has not blocked all of Ian's paths to a
nuclear weapon,'' as he boasts. The two main paths, through uranium enrichment
and plutonium processing, remain open. The only thing is that Iran's project
has been frozen for a decade or so at its current level, which means a year
from being able to build a bomb. Since I am certain the mullahs don't want to
build a bomb right now, if ever, that decade-long delay is the fools' gold
with which they repay Obama's fools' gold to them.
Amir Taheri was born in Ahvaz, southwest Iran, and educated in Tehran, London
and Paris. He was Executive Editor-in-Chief of the daily Kayhan in Iran
(1972-79). In 1980-84, he was Middle East Editor for the Sunday Times. In
1984-92, he served as member of the Executive Board of the International Press
Institute (IPI). Between 1980 and 2004, he was a contributor to the
International Herald Tribune. He has written for the Wall Street Journal, the
New York Post, the New York Times, the London Times, the French magazine
Politique Internationale, and the German weekly Focus. Between 1989 and 2005, he
was editorial writer for the German daily Die Welt. Taheri has published 11
books, some of which have been translated into 20 languages. He has been a
columnist for Asharq Alawsat since 1987. Taheri's latest book "The Persian
Night" is published by Encounter Books in London and New York.
©
EsinIslam.Com
Add Comments