Iran Has Stopped Dismantling its Centrifuges

Shortly after announcing that it had begun the process of dismantling centrifuges at its Fordow and Nantez nuclear facilities, the Iranian government has reversed itself and says it is no longer dismantling anything. Under intense criticism from hard-line members of Iran's Parliament, Iranian president Rouhani called for the dismantling process to stop.

The cessation put an end to what was largely a symbolic process in any case. Iran was not disassembling working centrifuges, but only decommissioned ones. It has approximately ten thousand older centrifuges that are no longer in operation. Dismantling these was an easy way for the regime to show some signs of compliance with the international community during the IAEA review of its program. This review is due to be released by mid-December.

Some Iranian cover for the IAEA would be helpful to the embattled agency. Sources within the Iranian government accidentally released an interview with deputy foreign minister Abbas Araghchi in which he explained to regime insiders that the IAEA report's outlines had been agreed upon before any inspections had taken place.

As far as the deal is concerned, these issues have been resolved, but there remain issues between us and the IAEA before it can finalize its report.That report will be gray. It will neither be black nor white. With regards to this issue, a roadmap has been signed by Mr. Salehi and Mr. Amano based on which, for example,we will present some of our own assessments on PMD by Aug. 15 and the IAEA will review them by Oct. 15, and that will conclude the task of the IAEA. We have no further problems as far as the deal is concerned, but by Dec. 15, Amano will present the final assessment and we have made some precautionary arrangements to hold off on certain things we need to do until the IAEA presents its final report. Meaning this will cause the Westerners themselves to pressure the IAEA to wrap up the case as soon as possible so that the deal could be implemented.

The IAEA has come under fire from critics of the Iran deal because of its failure to apply reasonable standards to the Iranian government, most famously in allowing Iran to collect its own samples at the Parchin military facility with no IAEA supervision. Critics suggest that the IAEA is allowing Iran to run roughshod over any semblance of legitimate compliance with the spirit or the letter of the JCPOA deal, even conspiring to help Iran appear to be in compliance when it is not. Being able to point to Iran's dismantling of even nonfunctional centrifuges would have been a much-needed fig leaf for IAEA officials when their report is released next month.

However, 20 parliamentarians rallied around the instructions of Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, who instructed that no sort of compliance with the deal should occur before the IAEA had certified that Iran was in the clear on the possible military dimensions of its program. President Rouhani, whose powers are constitutionally quite limited and who must adhere to the will of the Supreme Leader, gave way before this protest.

Criticism of his government by hard line parliamentarians has been very intense in the wake of the Iran deal's negotiation. Parliament stopped short of actually endorsing the deal or committing Iran to any non-voluntary standards of compliance. Supreme Leader Khamenei further weakened the parliament's decision with his guidelines for enforcement, which represent a substantial alteration of the deal versus the one that President Obama actually signed. Iran has substantially rewritten the deal for itself, but so far the Obama administration has remained "alarmingly passive" in accepting any alterations the Iranians enact. So far there are no signs that the administration intends to react to this change either. Instead, the Obama administration is moving forward with plans for another major concession to Iran, de-listing the Iran Revolutionary Guards Corps as a terrorist organization.

Trump: Iran Deal Requires U.S. Protecting Iran in Event of Israeli Strike

by Jacob Kornbluh
Sept 2, 2015

In a phone interview with CNN Tuesday evening, Trump claimed that there's "something in the Iran deal" that "people don't understand" saying if someone attacks Iran, "we have to come to their defense."

"Does that include Israel?" Trump asked. "And most people say yes, they don't have an exclusion for Israel. So if Israel attacks Iran, according to that deal, I believe, the way it reads, unless they have a codicil or they have something to it, that we have to fight with Iran against Israel." ..."

Trump was most probably referring to language highlighted by the opponents of the deal. On page 142, the deal includes a clause that states, "Co-operation through training and workshops to strengthen Iran's ability to protect against, and respond to nuclear security threats, including sabotage, as well as to enable effective and sustainable nuclear security and physical protection systems."

Washington-based Center for Security Policy asserted that Annex III appears "to commit the United States and other world powers to the defense of Iran's nuclear program."

http://jpupdates.com/2015/09/02/trump-iran-deal-requires-u-s-protecting-iran-in-event-of-israeli-strike/
_________________________________________________

Aug 2015...

__________________________________________________________

Russian build-up in Syria part of secret deal with Iran's Quds Force leader

September 11, 2015
Jennifer Griffin, Lucas Tomlinson
FoxNews.com

As the Pentagon warily eyes a Russian military build-up in Syria, Western intelligence sources tell Fox News that the escalated Russian presence began just days after a secret Moscow meeting in late July between Iran's Quds Force commander - their chief exporter of terror - and Russian President Vladimir Putin.

Fox News has learned Quds head Qassem Soleimani and Putin discussed such a joint military plan for Syria at that meeting, an encounter first reported by Fox News in early August. ..."

The Quds Force is the international arm of Iran's Revolutionary Guard, involved in exporting terrorism to Iran's proxies throughout the Middle East including Lebanon, Syria, Iraq and Yemen. ..."

Officials who have monitored the build-up say they've seen more than 1,000 Russian combatants - some of them from the same plainclothes Special Forces units who were sent to Crimea and Ukraine. Some of these Russian troops are logistical specialists and needed for security at the expanding Russian bases.

http://www.foxnews.com/politics/2015/09/11/russian-build-up-in-syria-part-secret-deal-with-irans-quds-force-leader/
__________________________________________________________

Pro-Hezbollah Paper: Russia, Iran, Syria, Hezbollah Form Alliance

Sept 23, 2015

A prominent pro-Hezbollah newspaper in Lebanon reported Tuesday that Russia and the terrorist organization have formed an alliance and will fight together in Syria. "The parties to the alliance are the states of Russia, Iran, Syria, and Iraq, with Lebanon's Hezbollah as the fifth party,"

Al-Akhbar Editor in Chief Ibrahim al-Amin wrote. The pact would be called the "4+1 alliance", a pun based on the P5+1 that negotiated the nuclear deal with Iran. Hezbollah is a proxy of Iran based in Lebanon and Moscow has been working with Tehran to save Bashar al-Assad's regime, even sending men and weapons to Syria.

http://www.thedailybeast.com/cheats/2015/09/22/report-russia-partners-with-hezbollah.html
__________________________________________________________

From Real Clear Politics, Sept 10, 2015...

"In a 2014 New Yorker interview, Obama said his goal was to create a 'new equilibrium' in the Middle East.

In the short run, at least, his signature diplomatic undertaking can be counted on to bring more violence to this volatile region.

The Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action, as the [Obama-Putin Iran deal] agreement is formally known, provides the world's leading state sponsor of terrorism an infusion of somewhere in the neighborhood of $100 billion of unfrozen assets and a great deal more of continuing revenues as businesses and governments around the world rush to profit from oil-and-gas-rich Iran's reintegration into the world economy.

The agreement relaxes the international isolation of the Islamic Republic and ratifies Tehran's status as a nuclear threshold state. And it relieves restrictions on Iran's acquisition of weapons, including ballistic missiles. ..."

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/articles/2015/09/10/iran_deal_throws_sparks_on_mideast_tinderbox_128034.html

Or did Obama WANT a nuclear-armed Iran?

Obama and his secret partner.

March 2012...

"Obama was talking with Russian President Dmitry Medvedev when neither of them realized that their conversation was being picked up by microphones. Here is what they said:

Obama: "On all these issues, but particularly missile defense, this, this can be solved, but it's important for him to give me space."

Medvedev: "Yeah, I understand. I understand your message about space. Space for you ..."

Obama: "This is my last election. After my election, I have more flexibility."

Medvedev: "I understand. I will transmit this information to Vladimir."

"This is my last election. After my election I have more flexibility." That statement tells us much about the president's mindset.

The specific mention of missile defense is worrisome enough. Mr. Obama has retreated from the missile defense plan that was negotiated with European allies during the George W. Bush administration. Apparently, he is signaling Moscow that he intends to retreat further. The clear implication from the president's comments is that he cannot tell the American people before the election what he plans to do after the election.

In addition, there is the phrase "on all these issues," implying more is at stake than just missile defense."

Article: Obama plans double cross on missile defense
When it comes to keeping America safe, we shouldn't be too flexible:
http://www.washingtontimes.com/news/2012/mar/29/obama-plans-double-cross-on-missile-defense/print/
__________________________________________________________

Image and video hosting by TinyPic

From the campaign trail, 2008...

Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs

February 29, 2008 :: News
MissileThreat.com

A video has surfaced of Presidential candidate Senator Barack Obama talking on his plans for strategic issues such as nuclear weapons and missile defense.

The full text from the video, as released, reads as follows:

Thanks so much for the Caucus4Priorities, for the great work you've been doing. As president, I will end misguided defense policies and stand with Caucus4Priorities in fighting special interests in Washington.

First, I'll stop spending $9 billion a month in Iraq. I'm the only major candidate who opposed this war from the beginning. And as president I will end it.[i.e. not win it]

Second, I will cut tens of billions of dollars in wasteful spending.

I will cut investments in unproven missile defense systems.

I will not weaponize space.

I will slow our development of future combat systems.

And I will institute an independent "Defense Priorities Board" to ensure that the Quadrennial Defense Review is not used to justify unnecessary spending.

Third, I will set a goal of a world without nuclear weapons. To seek that goal, I will not develop new nuclear weapons; I will seek a global ban on the production of fissile material; and I will negotiate with Russia to take our ICBMs off hair-trigger alert, and to achieve deep cuts in our nuclear arsenals.

You know where I stand. I've fought for open, ethical and accountable government my entire public life. I don't switch positions or make promises that can't be kept. I don't posture on defense policy and I don't take money from federal lobbyists for powerful defense contractors. As president, my sole priority for defense spending will be protecting the American people. Thanks so much.

Article: Obama Pledges Cuts in Missile Defense, Space, and Nuclear Weapons Programs:

http://web.archive.org/web/20090412030633/http://missilethreat.com/archives/id.7086/detail.asp

"MissileThreat.com is a project of The Claremont Institute devoted to understanding and promoting the requirements for the strategic defense of the United States."

"According to the Washington Free Beacon, Russia's nuclear arsenal how has over 100 nuclear warheads above the limit set by the treaty.

Since the treaty was launched, Russia has deployed 111 new nuclear warheads, bringing its total number of deployed warheads to 1,648. That treaty limit is 1,550 warheads - a number that must be reached in 2018.

Comparatively, the numbers of U.S. nuclear warheads, missiles and bombers have fallen dramatically and are already below the limits set by the treaty. Additionally, the United States has decreased the number of warheads in its deployed nuclear arsenal by 250.

While the United States intends to eliminate heavy bombers and launchers, Russia has launched a strategic nuclear force expansion.

Russian President Vladimir Putin also recently announced a new doctrine that placed priority on nuclear forces.

If this raises concern for you, you are not alone.

Rep. Mike Rogers, R-Ala., chairman of the House Armed Services Subcommittee on Strategic Forces, said Russia "is in the business of violating treaties."

Rogers said Putin has violated several agreements and treaties in the past, and he simply "violates any treaty or agreement that puts limits on capabilities that Mr. Putin and his cronies desire."

"Russia's arguable adherence to the New START Treaty just indicates how bad a deal it is for the United States," he said.

Adm. William Gortney, commander of the U.S. Northern Command, said Wednesday that Russia has read our play book and is "fielding cruise missiles that are very, very accurate, very long range."

Gortney said these missiles have the ability to reach targets in Canada and the United States. He added that Russia has been participating in war game scenarios recently that simulate cruise missile strikes in Alaska.

This news is serious because it appears Russia has no intention of abiding by New START or any other treaty. We should therefore be building up our military and our arsenals instead of depleting them.

source:
http://theminorityreportblog.com/2015/10/11/red-alert-russia-just-did-this-to-its-nuclear-arsenal-and-it-should-put-us-on-high-alert/?utm_source=dlvr.it&utm_medium=twitter

========================================================

From the FreeBeacon:

Russia Adds 111 Warheads Under Arms Treaty
Moscow warheads above New START treaty limit

By: Bill Gertz
October 9, 2015

Russia has now deployed more than 100 nuclear warheads in its strategic arsenal above the limits set by the New START arms treaty limits, two years before it must meet treaty arms reduction goals.

"New START nuclear warhead and delivery system numbers made public Oct. 1 reveal that since the 2010 arms accord went into force, Moscow increased the number of deployed nuclear warheads by a total of 111 weapons for a total of 1,648 deployed warheads. That number is 98 warheads above the treaty limit of 1,550 warheads that must be reached by the 2018 deadline of the treaty.

At the same time, U.S. nuclear warheads, missiles, and bombers have fallen sharply and remain below the required levels under the New START pact.

The United States during the same period of the Russian increases cut its deployed nuclear arsenal by 250 warheads. ..."

(more...)

http://freebeacon.com/national-security/russia-adds-111-warheads-under-arms-treaty/

From Investor's Business Daily, Jan 2012:

Obama To Betray Missile Defense Secrets To Moscow
Investor's Business Daily ^ | January 9, 2012 | IBD staff

Appeasement: From ObamaCare to recess appointments, honoring the Constitution has not been an administration hallmark. But when it comes to betraying secrets to mollify the Russians, it becomes a document the president hides behind.

It was bad enough that the 2012 defense authorization bill signed by President Obama set America on a downward spiral of military mediocrity.

He also issued a signing statement, something he once opposed, saying that language in the bill aimed at protecting top-secret technical data on the U.S. Standard Missile-3 - linchpin of our missile defense - might impinge on his constitutional foreign-policy authority.

Section 1227 of the defense law prohibits spending any funds that would be used to give Russian officials access to sensitive missile-defense technology as part of a cooperation agreement without first sending Congress a report identifying the specific secrets, how they'd be used and steps to protect the data from compromise.

The president is required to certify that any technology shared will not be passed on to third parties such as China, North Korea or Iran, that the Russians will not use transferred secrets to develop countermeasures and that the Russians are reciprocating in sharing missile-defense technology. ..."

"In his signing statement, Obama said he would treat these legal restrictions as 'non-binding' and that 'my administration will also interpret and implement section 1244 (sic) in a manner that does not interfere with the president's constitutional authority to conduct foreign affairs and avoids the undue disclosure of sensitive diplomatic communications.'

Betraying our secrets is easy for a president who betrayed allies Poland and the Czech Republic to placate Moscow.

Poland was to host ground-based interceptors such as those we've deployed in California and Alaska, with missile-tracking radar deployed in the Czech Republic.

Obama pulled the plug when Moscow objected. Never mind, he said, we have a better approach: a four-phase plan that calls for using three versions of the Navy's Standard SM-3 interceptor missile that forms the backbone of its Aegis missile-defense system.

The fourth phase consists of a missile still on the drawing board scheduled for deployment by 2020, a version of the SM-3 called the Block IIB. It would intercept hostile missiles in the "early intercept" phase before an enemy missile could release its warheads and decoys. The Russians want the SM-3's secrets, and Obama appears to be willing to turn them over.

The president wants to save the New Start Treaty, which the Russians have threatened to abandon if we try to fully implement President Reagan's dream of defeating a nuclear missile attack.

Russia has unilaterally asserted that any qualitative or quantitative improvement in U.S. missile defenses would be grounds for withdrawal from the treaty.

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.