Replies

I posted this on another thread and in regards to a similar article ...

— — — — —

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 ...