Iranian Foreign Ministry spokesman Bahram Kasemi 17 September warned the US about the dangers of continuing Iranophobia’s policy and urged White House officials to adopt a rational approach to the Islamic Republic of Iran. Another reason for the Iranian criticism of the US administration was the accusation of Rece Tillerson State Secretary of Tehran in the destabilizing role in the region, made on the CBS television channel. The US has a lot of questions to Iran, the head of the Department of State said, and the problems of complying with the nuclear agreement are only part of them.
Washington once again demonstrates its intention to continue the confrontational line with respect to one of the leading countries in the Middle East, not taking into account the real causes of instability in the region and not wanting to admit its own mistakes. So says Iranian supreme leader Ayatollah Khamenei, pointing out that “despite all agreements, commitments and lengthy discussions, the US approach to negotiations and their results is completely tyrannical, authoritarian and mocking.”
Ayatollah Khamenei speaks of growing hostility towards Iran as a result of inciting other Middle Eastern countries against the Islamic Republic. The main source of instability in the region, the Iranian leader said, is the US military presence. The Iranian leadership is convinced that the countries of the Middle East can put an end to the threat of the spread of terrorism. As for threats of using military force against Iran, Ayatollah Khamenei warned: “The enemy should know that if bullying is effective in other parts of the world, in Iran it will not pass ...”
The new phase of confrontation between Iran and the United States is largely due to the fact that President Donald Trump must notify Congress before 15 October that Iran is fulfilling the terms of the nuclear agreement signed by the previous US administration. If Trump withdraws the certification of the Iranian deal, it will not automatically break the agreement, but will open the door to new US sanctions. True, the speaker of the Iranian parliament, Ali Larijani, believes that US officials have already “torn off” the DFAS (Joint Comprehensive Action Plan). That is how he appreciated the approval by the US Congress of the last bill with the adoption of new sanctions against Iran.
Today, much points to the fact that the White House may refuse to follow the agreements reached with Tehran. In particular, this was discussed at the meeting of Donald Trump with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, which took place on September 18 in New York. The sides reaffirmed their goals of countering Iranian influence in the region. At the same time, the head of the Israeli government expressed concern not only about the Iranian nuclear deal, but also about the fact that Iran and its allies are occupying areas left by the Islamic state troops (IG, prohibited in Russia).
IG terrorists are less concerned about Tel Aviv than the inevitable prospect of their defeat in neighboring Syria. Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman said recently that Israel would not allow the creation of a “Shiite corridor” between Iran and Syria and would do everything possible for that. We are talking about new military measures to contain Tehran. At the same time, the efforts undertaken by Israel are coordinated with Washington and in most cases are of a general nature.
For example, before meeting Netanyahu with the American president in Israel, they announced the opening of a joint missile defense base with the Americans on Israeli territory. “This is the first time we have established a permanent US military base in the State of Israel under the American flag,” said the commander of the Office aviation defense of the Israeli army Zwika Haimovich.
It should be noted that the US military presence on the Israeli antimissile basis, besides under Israeli command and in limited composition, has little effect on the balance of power. More importantly, the Jewish state, which is in opposition to most countries of the Arab world, for the first time reached such unconditional support of the White House. This is Trump’s challenge to the Arab world in the first place, while Iran doesn’t create an immediate threat. Tehran is more concerned about the Israeli Air Force 50 purchases of the latest F-35 fighter jets, which increase Israel’s already high offensive potential.
Such “compliance” of the White House creates a risk for the United States to support the possible armed actions of Israel against Iran. In such requests, the administration of Barack Obama denied Israel more than once. Now, as the Israeli edition of Haaretz admits, Netanyahu is increasingly confident of pushing the United States to war with Iran.
Even if President Trump remains faithful to his manner of reflexively resisting almost all the major foreign policy decisions of his predecessor in the White House, the rejection of the agreement approved by Obama on the Iranian nuclear program cannot be just an American initiative. Western allies in Europe, most notably the United Kingdom, France and Germany, who signed the SVPD in 2015, remain committed to the agreement and said they are ready to disagree with Trump on this issue. The FPA is a multilateral and international agreement approved by the UN Security Council. "Breaking the nuclear agreement with Iran will not bring any benefit to the US administration, but will undermine the credibility of the United States by the international community," said Iranian President Rouhani, who is in New York, participating in the 72 session of the UN General Assembly. In his opinion, the only result of the US withdrawal from the nuclear deal will be shame.
This deal concerns not only the Iranian nuclear program. The agreement with Tehran was a triumph of diplomacy, which showed the world the possibility of solving the most complex international problems at the negotiating table. In fact, the leading countries of the world agreed that the Islamic Republic is a major regional power that has its own national interests and is able to defend them. It was expected and the termination of the American policy of deterrence of Tehran. Now the United States seems to want to reverse the situation with Iran.
“We have different options. If the US withdraws from a nuclear deal, we have developed and studied retaliatory measures and the world will soon witness Iran’s actions. We can return to the situation before a nuclear deal is concluded in a few days, ”the Iranian president said. This option will not increase security in the region and will not be satisfied with anyone except Israel and Saudi Arabia. These countries benefit from the US military presence in the Middle East and the most hostile relations between the US and Iran.
The agreement on the Iranian nuclear program deprives Americans of a reason for a tougher line against Tehran. Washington began to argue that the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) is not persistently inspecting suspicious military installations in Iran. The Iranian authorities, in response, called on the IAEA to put an end to Israel’s illegal nuclear arsenal, with the involvement of UN inspectors to create a nuclear-free zone in the Middle East. weapons.
Why not? At least, the IAEA does not have any claims against Iran related to the failure to implement the DFTS, but the international community still lacks clarity regarding nuclear Israel.