iran nuclear deal

Feanor

Super Moderator
Staff member
I guess it’s about getting what you bargained for. Iran was promised better trade, economic benefits. When the US withdrew, and reimposed sanctions, causing these benefits to disappear, they felt the deal was breached. It’s old term law that when one side breaches, performance is excused. Legally Iran has an excuse. This is not going to play well. Iran won’t be able to trade, irrespective of what the EU does if they don’t deal with the US, by imposing sanctions. Benton-Woods set the dollar as the reserve currency. The EU could decide if the US won’t comply, the won’t accept dollars. So it’s put up, or shut up time. Will the EU act to give Iran what they bargained for or not? If not, expect Iran to declare the deal void, and go about their way. Then you either let them, or go to war. Not good at all.

Art
It's a complicated subject. Iran is under fewer sanctions that it had been in the past. For example Iran is in preliminary talks to buy Russian SSJ-100 airliners. The airliners have US components (22% allegedly) which blocks current sales, but a "Russified" variant (the SSJ-95R or SSJ-75 depending on who you ask) is being developed for customers like Iran, where US components will make up less than 10% and won't require US approval for export sales. However the same airliner has plenty of European components, including Russo-French engines, which are a lot harder to replace. If the EU re-imposes full scale sanctions it will certainly limit Iran. Additionally Iran has a deal with Russia to get their nuclear fuel, use it, and then return the waste to Russia. Will Russia continue to sell Iran nuclear materials if they know that Iran could use it for weapons? Right now Iran is complying with the deal and not building weapons. The US looks aggressive, and Iran almost looks like the victim (their other "activities" notwithstanding). But if Iran returns to trying to produce nuclear weapons, the game changes. And given Russo-Israeli relations, and Russia's complex game across the Middle East, I'm not sure even they would stand by Iran if Iran went nuclear. I mean look at Russian and North Korea. They still have some bilateral trade, but the DPRK gets basically no real political support from Russia. And if even Russia won't support them Iran will end up in international isolation all over again.

I think the smartest thing Iran can do is stick to the terms of the deal, while complaining loudly about US unfairness, and meanwhile work with the EU, Russia, China, and anyone else who is willing, to undermine and circumvent US efforts in this department.
 

ngatimozart

Super Moderator
Staff member
Verified Defense Pro
A couple of articles about tensions between the US and its allies over the US unilaterally ratcheting up tensions with Iran and US claims of intelligence reposrts to support its reasons.

Tensions over Iran show cracks in a time-tested alliance

Allies hunker down in Iraq, drop out over US tensions with Iran

I have to be honest, I don't think the US re-imposition of sanctions on Iran are legal and that by withdrawing from the 2015 agreement, re-imposing sanctions and being bellicose towards Iran, actually places Iran in the moral high ground. If for any reason the US orchestrates an attack against Iran, it would gift Iran causus belli for a just war of defence against a foreign aggressor and leave itself open to charges of waging a war of aggression. I could be wrong here, but I think that the sanctions recently re-imposed by the US could be an seen as an act of war. If the roles were reversed and the US had such or similar sanctions placed against it, there would be war. My view that this is a monumental blunder by the White House and the winners out of this will not be the US or Iran, but Russia and China, who are the main opposition.
 

weaponwh

Member
well with trump, bolton and other right in the WH. dont think they care about moral high ground now. Trump want to dismantle anything from obama era. i wonder what China/turkey/india would do if US insist them to stop buying oil from Iran, they may have to give in. That would put even more pressure on iran.
 

John Fedup

The Bunker Group
GW3 is not a good outcome for anybody and especially for the US which has pi$$ed away trillions along with thousands of its soldiers. If Donald Trump thinks another war will enhance his position with his "base" he is in for a rude shock. I think he knows this. This is all Bolton and hopefully the Donald's survival instincts kick in before the stuff hits the fan.
 

kiwipatriot69

Active Member
GW3 is not a good outcome for anybody and especially for the US which has pi$$ed away trillions along with thousands of its soldiers. If Donald Trump thinks another war will enhance his position with his "base" he is in for a rude shock. I think he knows this. This is all Bolton and hopefully the Donald's survival instincts kick in before the stuff hits the fan.
Yes, and now reports Iran is enriching its nuclear reactors This could get really ugly, not just with Usa/ Iran, but neighbouring countries too, and whatever allied forces in the area. I'm suspicious about those damaged ships, could they be caused by carelessness from the Captains themselves, in a much congested shipping area? Nz and pacific have in recent years have had groundings by similar sized vessels, for that reason.
 

yavar

Member
No Measure against Iran to Go Unanswered: Zarif
No Measure against Iran to Go Unanswered: Zarif - Politics news - Tasnim News Agency



Hezbollah said to bypass US sanctions by entering drug trade into Europe
Hezbollah said to bypass US sanctions by entering drug trade into Europe


Iran deports 100,000 Afghan refugees due to sanctions
Iran deports 100,000 Afghan refugees due to sanctions


EU countries specifically France and Geremy England after 90 days period will face conceconcess and the effect will start kicking in after year time and European public will feel it


there will be consequences the days of runing round Loose has ended
 
Last edited:

yavar

Member
i think memebers misunderstood.

what IRI Iran meant was, the reverse immigration to Afghanistan will harden the Afghan public will be able to come to Iran no problem, but they can NOT go back ,

what they mean is the Afghan refugee campes which are built in khorasan province in eastern border will be dismantold totally and the new camps i will open in western border in Azarbijan province,



so the Ghani gavorment has got nothing to worry about



Turkish official already face massive problem but it will be increased by 3 to four fold



in 2017


Turkey Deputy Prime Minister Veysi Kaynak 3 million new immigration wave from Iran "We worry that the Iranian state is ignoring their migration toward Turkey,"

3 million new migrants could come to Turkey from Iran, Deputy PM Kaynak says



+ the operation in Idlib syria will make new waves of refugees to Turkey so ............








++++







soon Tons i mean massive tons drugs will hit western Europe i mean the street + cheap







as I said before there will be consequences for EU the days of runing round Loose has ended
 

yavar

Member
U.S Trump visit to Japan And Joint Press Conference with the Prime Minister of Japan : No regime change, current Iranian leaders, Prime Minister of Japan next visit to Iran
 

Persian Gulf

New Member
EU is not fulfilling its obligations under the JCPOA and Iran has given them long enough to grow balls to use INSTEX rather than talk about it.
 

OPSSG

Super Moderator
Staff member
Exercise some basic courtesy and provide links, to educate others where you can -- so that you can have a long productive stay in DT. But we have a zero tolerance policy for trolls. It is a requirement of this forum that any claims in posts must be supported by sources.

Rule 7. Do not make one-liner posts.
Rule 14. You must post source of your information/articles ( link, website, book, magazine, etc.).
Rule 23. There is both an expectation and requirement that members will put some effort into what they post with research, providing facts and links where appropriate and associated posting behaviors, to maintain the quality and level of discussion on DefenceTalk.

I strongly suggest that you read the RULES.
EU is not fulfilling its obligations under the JCPOA and Iran has given them long enough to grow balls
@ananda knows more about banking than I do but I will say that the international financial system is complex and it does not work the way most laymen think. Not only can the US government apply the correct pressure points (to deter companies from trading with Iran by placing companies and individuals on the sanctions list), the internal compliance officers of many companies would want to avoid running a fowl of US laws (as they want to trade in the US and use USD to support their other international trades). Its a source of commercial advantage, to skirt sanctions but not in a manner that breaks US laws.

And as a courtesy, I provide a link below to explain my point of view.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said: ""We're making clear that we didn't just talk about keeping the nuclear deal with Iran alive, but now we're creating a possibility to conduct business transactions." But that does not mean individual European companies will get internal board approval to trade with Iran. The world does not revolve around Iranian concerns.
I will only talk on US action based on legal base. Financial industries for whatever reason..still depend much of it to 'US Dollar' transaction system. Also much of world financing centers are still within US or US influences.

In short, US can blockades any transaction with Iran or Venezuela or North Korea that are using USD or Financial transaction influenced by US Financial systems.
And Like it or not..it's legal...

You can trade with Iran as long as you don't used US financial influenced system. The thing is, much of the world still trading with US financial influenced system. For example most global Banks still using 'SWIFT' system on transacting with each other internationally. That system still centered on financial centered in US or under US influences. You can trade internationally without this system, but most of the Banks only want to trade using this system Internationally. And you need global Banks if you want to trade 'normally'.
Agreed.
to use INSTEX rather than talk about it.
It is not so simple. The Europeans need to talk about it, so that their companies are aware of INSTEX as an option; but individual European companies will still need to conduct their own risk assessment of working with Iranian counterparties.
 

Persian Gulf

New Member
@ananda knows more about banking than I do but I will say that the international financial system is complex and it does not work the way most laymen think. Not only can the US government apply the correct pressure points (to deter companies from trading with Iran by placing companies and individuals on the sanctions list), the internal compliance officers of many companies would want to avoid running a fowl of US laws (as they want to trade in the US and use USD to support their other international trades). Its a source of commercial advantage, to skirt sanctions but not in a manner that breaks US laws.

And as a courtesy, I provide a link below to explain my point of view.

German Foreign Minister Heiko Maas said: ""We're making clear that we didn't just talk about keeping the nuclear deal with Iran alive, but now we're creating a possibility to conduct business transactions." But that does not mean individual European companies will get internal board approval to trade with Iran. The world does not revolve around Iranian concerns.

Agreed.

It is not so simple. The Europeans need to talk about it, so that their companies are aware of INSTEX as an option; but individual European companies will still need to conduct their own risk assessment of working with Iranian counterparties.
Note to self: make longer posts so I don't have to see a big green wall of text on every post I make!

Yes I don't dispute US financial hegemony.

EU's 'blocking statute' makes it against EU law for companies to comply with US sanctions, but unfortunately there is no political will to enforce this (also: evidential difficulties in proving the company ceased business with Iran because of the specified US sanctions). The blocking statute was previously implemented in 1996 to counter illegal US extraterritorial sanctions against Cuba. But even then only one enforcement (against Austria's BAWAG bank).

Heiko Maas is a very intelligent and reasonable man. His quote there however does not make sense - in order to keep the JCPOA alive you must conduct business transactions. It is not two separate things - the first depends on the second.

Blocking statute and clawback provisions are designed to prevent US enforcement of what EU views as illegal extraterritorial sanctions against EU companies. The EU has not enforced these provisions in practice thus they are regularly violated.

Ultimately, EU must determine if they have the political will to assert their economic sovereignty and conduct legal trade with Iran, in accordance with their obligations under the JCPOA, or not. So far - they chose not.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
Blocking statute and clawback provisions are designed to prevent US enforcement of what EU views as illegal extraterritorial sanctions against EU companies. The EU has not enforced these provisions in practice thus they are regularly violated.

Ultimately, EU must determine if they have the political will to assert their economic sovereignty and conduct legal trade with Iran, in accordance with their obligations under the JCPOA, or not. So far - they chose not.
"The mechanism is designed to facilitate trade in legitimate humanitarian products in the first instance, so will not support high value oil transactions for a while, yet, and no European companies have come forward thus far to engage with it".

That's comin from this:
Verity Iran

It's not whether EU have a political will or not, it's the matter whether individual EU commercial company deems doing business with Iran can justify their commercial risk being blacklisted by US authority to enter US financial systems.

Even China companies still using USD on majority of their international trade, despite China has increase bilateral Yuan-Local currency trade agreement with several large trading partners.

Again most World Financial Center from New York, San Francisco, London, Paris, Dubai, Singapore, Hong Kong, Shanghai, Tokyo..are interconnected to each other with Financial Market that 'well like it or not' still influence by New York. New York still main hub of Global Capital circulation.

Thus using USD and US Financial market still provide the 'lowest cost' for most international trade financial payment system.

EU can say they want to keep JCPOA alive, the German, French and UK can say they provide INSTEX to keep trade with Iran alive without using US Financial system.
However they can not force individual companies in EU to 'engage' in commercial activities that can risk them blacklisted from US system and market.

So, it's not the matter of Political will. Even more authoritarian power like China also can not force most of their commercial companies to do business with Iran, North Korea, or Venezuela...cause they now it will hurt those companies International Trade.

And like what OPSSG quote on my previous post. It's within US rights to denied any companies or entity to enter their Market and Financial system, cause..every nation in this world has the right to close their own market or financial system to 'any commercial entities' that they deemed uncomplied to their national 'security' interest.
 
Last edited:

aussienscale

The Bunker Group
Verified Defense Pro
Note to self: make longer posts so I don't have to see a big green wall of text on every post I make!
Quick question, do you know what a forum moderator is and what they actually do ? also do you know what forum rules are and why they get put into place and why it is recommended, and also a requirement as per the terms of joining a forum to read and understand the rules of the forum ?

If you want to roll out your fanboi tripe this is not the forum for you !

This is a fully moderated forum for serious and respectful discussion. One more thing I will point out to you is that most of the Moderators on this forum, and also other members like myself who have the blue Defpro tag are either current or ex serving members of Defence forces from around the world, or civilians with extensive experience in a relevant field. It is not a tag that you just get like other forum based on the number of posts you make.

To get a blue Defpro tag we go through a vetting process with the website in which we have to supply verified documents to prove our claims of service.

So I would suggest you read the rules, understand what this forum is all about and take note of what people are trying to teach you.

Cheers
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
China Imports First Iranian Oil Since U.S. Ended Sanction Waivers | OilPrice.com

So, this is not EU, but China. The one customer that Iran now will depend much on it's Oil export.
They are still buying Oil from Iran, but in much reduce numbers and also seems will limit the refinery companies that are going to Import Iran oil.

This shown, even China is limiting the numbers of companies that are going to expose themselves to the risks in doing business with Iran.
By limiting the number of companies that dealing with Iran (like on few refineries that will buy Iran oil), they are seems choosing the companies that have least exposure on trading within Global Financial system that are still much depend on USD influenced.

Again this shown that even China has to choose wisely which companies that they'll risk to be exposed to potential US sanctions (and I bet most of them are their state owned enterprises).
This kind of thing will be difficult on EU situation, where most of the companies are commercial business entity that can't be force by EU government to keep doing business with Iran.
 

Sandhi Yudha

Well-Known Member

I have my doubts that anything will change soon, most Western-/NATO-/under american influence countries do not dare to start to sell defence equipment to Iran. From which i understand only 13 out of 20 ordered ATR-72 are delivered for example, and these are civilian aircrafts.

So i think we can only expect countries like china, Russia and maybe Ukraine and Turkey who are willing to sell their stuff to Iran.
 

Ananda

The Bunker Group
On arms deal whether it's still Republican White House after November or Democrats one, US will still put a break for Arms deal from Western Nation.
This sanction lifting will give more room for Russia and China arms producers for Iran deal. I don't think even Ukraine or Turkey want to take chances, just for the sake of Iran deal.

Russian and Chinese arms supplier mostly already under US Embargoes anyway. So they'll not care what Washington whether Congress or White House opinion on this. They're only need International Legality to trade Arms with Iran. Iran also already build their military assets with Chinese and Russian sources anyway.

Anyway since Iran can't get hold on Hard Currencies trading (especially USD based), then deal with Iran will take either direct barter or third parties financial intermediate. This will create more costs for Iran and margin for Chinese and Russian.
 

Big_Zucchini

Well-Known Member
Yeah, but it hardly matters whether it'll cost Iran anything.
As a concept, once you open up more choices for Iran, it becomes more flexible in its decision making and its efforts in whatever foreign policy it maintains, will be more effective.

I think the rejection of renewed sanctions on Iran, particularly by American allies, is symbolic of at least some rot in the alliances and relations the US maintains, and those Israel and regional allies maintain with the west.

Allies need to be united in their decision making versus their own enemies, and enemies of allies.
The US is investing ridiculous amounts of money and manpower into protecting countries worldwide, against countries or groups that aren't even directly threatening the US.
Russia is a rival to the US but on a scale of threat, it's a much bigger threat to basically any eastern and central European country than to the US.

You cannot have allies vote against you. The sad reality is that eventually Iran will grow to something that starts threatening the entire west, and many European governments will remain unaware until Iran already makes a move against their interests.
 
Top