As the President Trump’s deadline on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is getting closer, an ambiance of a hubbub is looming inside Iran. The political figures warn the US and Europe about the Iranian regime’s options on the table in case of the collapse of the nuclear deal.
Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iranian regime’s foreign minister, visited the USA, clearly to convince the United States to stay in the nuclear deal. In an interview with the New Yorker weekly which was also aired by the regime’s official news agency (IRNA), Zarif talked about Iran regime’s ‘options on the table’, whilst Trump leaves the nuclear deal. He pointed to three choices.
— Iran (@Iran) April 29, 2018
First, abandoning the deal, and resuming enrichment of uranium, or even increasing it.
Iran’s second option is to use the existing mechanism in the agreement which allows a formal suit to be sent to a commission that has been established to investigate a breach of the agreement.
The third option for Iran is deciding to withdraw from the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. But Tehran has not made any decision on the options.
Zarif also warned the United States that “if the United States intends to withdraw from the nuclear deal, it must also face its consequences.”
The question going forward is whether these options are realistic or not.
Stunning Confession today from a senior cleric who is Marja’ Taqlid (source of emulation) in Qom, Iran: “Better beware that if the nation rises up, the people will sweep us into the sea. Many have already fled or found a place to escape. But we have nowhere to escape to.” pic.twitter.com/qhufkjVJED
— Alireza Jafarzadeh (@A_Jafarzadeh) April 27, 2018
To answer this question about the first option, it is notable that it is considered as a violation of the JCPOA which is very dangerous for the regime. Even the regime’s experts have already warned about its dire consequences for the regime. Because a violation of the deal puts the regime against the UN Security Council and the resolution 2231 which includes regime under paragraph 7 of the UN Charter. As a result, not only all sanctions that have been eased will be applied again, but the Security Council can impose much heavier sanctions on the regime, as well, and may even issue a military punitive permission.
The second option is almost as dangerous and ill-fated as the first one. Because it is projected that if the complainant cannot prove the accuracy of the claim, it would be considered as a violation of the nuclear deal with the same consequences as the first option. Winning such a dispute depends on the fronts which will be formed at the time among the 5 + 1. It is not likely that the EU sacrifices its long-term benefits in related to the US for full support of the Iran regime. Russia and China have proved that cannot be relied on in tough times, plus the fact that cannot actually be replaced with the west regards the economic relations.
The bill passed by US House of Representatives, mandating sanctions on the Iranian regime and officials responsible for #HumanRights abuses is a necessary response to the world’s top rights violator. I hope it is rapidly adopted as law and enforced. #Iran
— Maryam Rajavi (@Maryam_Rajavi) April 27, 2018
But about the third option that the Iranian regime has raised, it must be considered that while the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) is discussed, the NPT or Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty is not placed importance on. Because NPT is a relatively side subject compared to the JCPOA. In the nuclear deal, there are some very rigid and even permanent restrictions on nuclear activities in Iran.
So speaking about “options on the table” is basically not real, and it’s just a hollow rhetoric.
But in order to comprehend the real place of the Iran regime, it is crucial to look into the issues beside and under the table, rather than “options on the table”.
The Iranian foreign minister’s visit to the United States and his statements have highlighted the real threats which the regime is faced with. In his speech at the US Foreign Relations Council, Zarif’s main goal was to implore negotiation with Saudi Arabia. He said that the Iran regime repeatedly had asked for dialog with Saudi Arabia, but they did not accept it. Zarif acknowledged Saudi Arabia’s reason for refusal and said: “It’s very important not to interfere in the internal affairs of the other, something that we are accused.” And he complained elsewhere that the regime and Saudi Arabia talk against each other a lot, but they do not talk to each other. The fact that Zarif is so keen on negotiation with Saudi Arabia, shows that Saudi Arabia has successfully turned the political atmosphere against the Iran regime in the US.
In another part of his speech, the Mullah’s Foreign Minister reprehended the war as a dangerous issue and rebuked it. He said, “When the United States did not want us to possess even one centrifuge we increased 2,000 centrifuges to 20,000 centrifuges.”
“In this process, the United States faced a large number of centrifuges and we reached from seven Percent economic growth to minus seven Percent, so we all lost. In a war, nobody will win, everyone loses,” Zarif added.
In this way, he exposed the Iranian regime’s dread of any confrontation and confessed to the disastrous impacts of the confrontation on the regime.
The Iran deal placed Iran’s nuclear program under international sponsorship and put us in the unsustainable position of having to defend that program. There is no fix for this. @POTUS should withdraw from this disastrous deal.
— Senator Ted Cruz (@SenTedCruz) April 27, 2018
These admissions are due to the weakened state of the regime. To prove this, it is enough to mention the recent sarcastic speech of Rouhani on the regime’s “Army Day” when he talked about the cleanness of the Army due to not meddling in economic activities, which indirectly was pointing to the IRGC’s corruption. Rouhani’s expression caused a tremor in the regime as a whole and created a new crises inside the Power, so that made Khamenei to meddle.
As a matter of fact, an unsteady and fragile regime like Mullah’s regime is not in a status to talk about “options on the table” against the US, Europe, and the international community.