Posted on 03/10/2015 8:48:01 AM PDT by SeekAndFind
Asked about the open letter of 47 US Senators to Iranian leaders, the Iranian Foreign Minister, Dr. Javad Zarif, responded that "in our view, this letter has no legal value and is mostly a propaganda ploy. It is very interesting that while negotiations are still in progress and while no agreement has been reached, some political pressure groups are so afraid even of the prospect of an agreement that they resort to unconventional methods, unprecedented in diplomatic history. This indicates that like Netanyahu, who considers peace as an existential threat, some are opposed to any agreement, regardless of its content.
Zarif expressed astonishment that some members of US Congress find it appropriate to write to leaders of another country against their own President and administration. He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.
Foreign Minister Zarif added that "I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law. The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.
The Iranian Foreign Minister added that "Change of administration does not in any way relieve the next administration from international obligations undertaken by its predecessor in a possible agreement about Iran`s peaceful nuclear program." He continued "I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law.
He emphasized that if the current negotiation with P5+1 result in a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, it will not be a bilateral agreement between Iran and the US, but rather one that will be concluded with the participation of five other countries, including all permanent members of the Security Council, and will also be endorsed by a Security Council resolution.
Zarif expressed the hope that his comments "may enrich the knowledge of the authors to recognize that according to international law, Congress may not modify the terms of the agreement at any time as they claim, and if Congress adopts any measure to impede its implementation, it will have committed a material breach of US obligations.
The Foreign Minister also informed the authors that majority of US international agreements in recent decades are in fact what the signatories describe as "mere executive agreements" and not treaties ratified by the Senate.
He reminded them that "their letter in fact undermines the credibility of thousands of such mere executive agreements that have been or will be entered into by the US with various other governments.
Zarif concluded by stating that "the Islamic Republic of Iran has entered these negotiations in good faith and with the political will to reach an agreement, and it is imperative for our counterparts to prove similar good faith and political will in order to make an agreement possible."
After the Deal is made, will Obama pay Iran the $100 Billion out of his personnel fortune ?
I believe in this area the US Constitution super cedes international law, at least as far as the US goes, and that international parties that enter into an executive agreement w/ the US should be aware of this fact.
That’s why the president is obligated to work w/the people’s representatives in congress in order to enter into a binding treaty.
When Obama read Jack And The Bean Stalk he thought he was reading Trump’s book The Art Of The Deal. Explains the Bergdahl swap as well. Unless, of course, he’s out to destroy western civilization.
%%
Zarif don’t like it ..... F*** the b*st***, F*** the b*st***
< /Clash OFF >
LOL. Loved the armadillo.
It does not become law until it is ratified by the senate. Until then its just happy talk.
In a strange way this Iranian POS is making our case for us.
Well ... it is clear that this guy in Iran doesn’t understand the USA and how it works ... LOL ...
The article said ... “He pointed out that from reading the open letter, it seems that the authors not only do not understand international law, but are not fully cognizant of the nuances of their own Constitution when it comes to presidential powers in the conduct of foreign policy.”
WHAT he doesn’t understand is that the President cannot bind the nation to a treaty with another nation without it being approved by the Senate. Now, the President can take unofficial actions and do things during his term in office that are not a treaty with another nation, but that other nation should not think that these actions are in any way binding on the next President or that Congress cannot act and outlaw certain actions.
—
And then the article says ... Foreign Minister Zarif added that “I should bring one important point to the attention of the authors and that is, the world is not the United States, and the conduct of inter-state relations is governed by international law, and not by US domestic law.
THE PROBLEM here is that there is nothing in International Law that can make the USA do something that was never approved by the nation in the first place. SO ... even if the President were engaging in unofficial actions, as stated above, the next President is not bound by those unofficial actions and the nation is not bound by those unofficial actions, no matter what this foreign minister thinks.
—
And then ... “The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfil the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal law as justification for failure to perform their international obligations.”
VERY BRIEFLY, it is NOT an “international obligation” since it would not have been an obligation that was entered into by “the nation” in the legal manner required to do so in that nation.
—
And lastly ... The Iranian Foreign Minister added that “Change of administration does not in any way relieve the next administration from international obligations undertaken by its predecessor in a possible agreement about Iran`s peaceful nuclear program.” He continued “I wish to enlighten the authors that if the next administration revokes any agreement with the stroke of a pen, as they boast, it will have simply committed a blatant violation of international law.
ONCE AGAIN ... there is NO LEGAL OBLIGATION if it is not formally enacted in the manner required by law in that nation. Iran cannot enforce something as an “international obligation” just because it wants it to be. It has to be FORMALLY and LEGALLY ENACTED within that nation.
— — —
Iran’s Foreign Minister is “blowing smoke” and talking AS IF he actually knows what is CONSTITUTIONAL in the USA ... LOL ...
Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif—who is scheduled to hold one-on-one talks with Kerry this evening in Vienna—”frequently shouts at Western diplomats” in such a forceful manner that bodyguards have hurriedly entered the negotiation room on occasion worried that an incident might occur, according to one Iranian diplomat involved in negotiations who spoke anonymously with the Iranian press earlier this week.
Well, we should demand the return of the Shah!
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.