Iran is now enriching MORE uranium than before the 2015 nuclear deal – President Rouhani

Iran has boosted its nuclear enrichment to levels not even seen before the JCPOA deal, President Hassan Rouhani has proclaimed, shortly after the Islamic Republic accused three European nations of “selling out” to the US.

“We are enriching more uranium [than] before the deal was reached ... Pressure has increased on Iran but we continue to progress,” Rouhani said in a televised address on Thursday.

Tehran is now bound by “no restrictions on nuclear energy,” Rouhani said, as Iran is “better off in terms of nuclear power.”

Under the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) – the official name of the 2015 deal – Iran had agreed to enrich uranium only up to 3.67 percent, a process typical for fuel in commercial nuclear power plants, and to stockpile no more than 300kg of this material.

Also on rt.com How Europe betrayed Iran: By triggering JCPOA dispute mechanism, EU helps Trump finish job of killing the Iran nuclear deal....

Iran was meticulously sticking to the pact after the US unilaterally departed from it in May 2018, re-imposing economic sanctions and ratcheting up bellicose rhetoric against Iran, as International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) had repeatedly confirmed. On their part, France, Germany and the UK — the three European signatories colloquially known as the E3 — rejected to stick to Donald Trump's "maximum pressure" policy.

Later that year, Iran began to gradually be scale back its commitments, insisting that European signatories failed to do their part of the deal.

In January, Tehran vowed that it will move beyond all uranium enrichment limitations set out in the stalling accord. The dramatic decision was made in response to the assassination General Qassem Soleimani — one of Iran's most influential military leaders — in a US drone strike on Iraqi soil earlier in the month.

Iran to break uranium stockpile limit set by 2015 nuclear deal...

Upping the ante, the E3 claimed Iran has no legal grounds to do so, and triggered a clause allowing to scrutinize its compliance with the deal.

Rebuking the move by the trio, Tehran vowed "a firm response" if the Europeans' decision threaten the largely defunct accord. On the other hand, it said that throwing out enrichment limitations was based “on technical needs,” and that Iran isn’t after atomic weapons.

Also on rt.com Non-commitment probe into Iran by France, Germany & UK ‘groundless,’ only increases tensions around nuclear deal – Russia   

  • Published in World

Seemingly Fragile Truce Between Trump and Iran

Donald Trump said last Thursday that the new sanctions imposed on Tehran are already working.

Excuse? The missile attacks on bases that house U.S. troops in Iraq.

"Already done. We have expanded them. They were very severe, but now they have increased. ”

And he added without further explanation: "I just recently approved them with the Treasury."

The president had promised hours earlier "additional punitive sanctions" in retaliation for the attack.

Seen by experts, he recalled the Associated France Press (AFP), as a moderate response to the assassination of Iranian General Qasem Soleimani.

The latter, in a North American strike with drones in Baghdad.

According to the Pentagon, there were eleven missiles fired by Iran that reached the air base of Ain al Asad (west) and another in the north used by North Americans and allied forces.

With these types of sanctions, said AFP, Washington's non-military response "was seen as a sign of good will to calm down the escalation of the conflict."

Iran (...) hit us with missiles. They shouldn't have done that. Fortunately for them, nobody was injured, nobody was killed,” Trump repeated on Thursday.

And then he added:

"They are very affected by the sanctions."

“They can strengthen their country's economy very quickly if they wish. We'll see if they negotiate or not. ”

Amid that apparently conciliatory atmosphere, Vice President Mike Pence said that Trump will ask his European allies to nullify the nuclear pact signed with Iran.

That agreement, observers recalled, was in the process of extinction since the United States withdrew from the commitment.

Pence was blunt: The president will ask our allies to withdraw from the "disastrous nuclear agreement with Iran" and demand that they give up their long history of terrorist violence.

As well as its nuclear ambitions, and join the family of nations.

Pence made his statements during an interview with the far-right "Fox & Friends."

Some indicated Trump's friction with Britain, France, Germany and other NATO members, since the U.S. backed down in 2018 from the nuclear agreement negotiated by Barack Obama.

Your excuse to do so? That it granted Tehran too many economic benefits without preventing that at some point it will build a nuclear weapon.

Great Britain, France, Germany, the European Union, China, and Russia have not left the agreement.

Another proof that corroborates how uncertain it is to establish any sort of obligation with Trump and his tribe.

All of this, when in reality, the fiery episode between Washington and Iran doesn’t seem to have end, in the first place.

U.S. targeted Iranian official in Yemen in failed strike

The United States military tried, but failed, to kill another senior Iranian commander on the same day a U.S. drone strike killed the Islamic Revolutionary Guard's top general, Qassem Soleimani, U.S. officials have admitted.

Officials said a military air attack targeted Abdul Reza Shahlai, a high-ranking commander in Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), but the mission was not successful.  The officials spoke to the Associated Press news agency on condition of anonymity in order to discuss a classified mission.  The Pentagon declined to discuss the highly classified operation.

"We have seen the report of a January 2 air strike in Yemen, which is long understood as a safe space for terrorists and other adversaries to the United States.  The Department of Defense does not discuss alleged operations in the region," said Navy Commander Rebecca Rebarich, a Pentagon spokesperson.  The Washington Post first reported the development.

The U.S. Department of the Treasury said Shahlai was based in Yemen and accused him of "a long history of targeting Americans and U.S. allies globally" -- including killing U.S.-led coalition forces in Iraq.  It has offered a $15 million reward in connection with him under its "Rewards for Justice" program.

The unsuccessful operation against Shahlai may indicate that the Trump administration's killing of Soleimani last week was part of a broader operation than previously explained, raising questions about whether the mission was designed to cripple the leadership of the IRGC or solely to prevent an imminent attack on Americans as originally stated.

The Trump administration has been under fire by Democrats and two Republicans in Congress over its decision to order the drone strike that killed Soleimani.  In an interview that aired earlier on Fox News, U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo acknowledged that Washington did not know "precisely" when or where the imminent attacks allegedly being planned by Soleimani would take place, but said the threat was "real".

U.S. military operations in Yemen are shrouded in secrecy -- primarily because they are illegal under international law.  U.S. officials said the operation against Shahlai remains highly classified, and many declined to offer details other than to say it was not successful.

  • Published in World

Not So Fast, Mr President: Did Trump Abuse His Power by Ordering Soleimani's Assassination?

Following US President Donald Trump's decision to assassinate prominent Iranian General Qasem Soleimani on 3 January, Washington and Tehran wound up on the verge of a full-scale armed conflict. But for now, both sides seem to have chosen to avoid bloodshed, with Iran’s retaliation resulting in only minor damage to American bases in Iraq.

The POTUS' unilateral decision to assassinate Iran’s top commander of the Quds Force without consulting with Congress in advance has sparked heated debate among US lawmakers on whether the president abused his powers and should be limited in his ability to take action that could lead to a war with the Islamic Republic.

The American legislature has in the past limited the commander-in-chief's power to make war, but, despite this, the Democrat-dominated House of Representatives passed a resolution, albeit non-binding, seeking to limit Donald Trump's ability to start hostilities against Iran. Here is what the process of launching foreign military operations looks like and how it actually works in the US right now.

Genuine Commander-in-Chief or Just a Lame Duck?

The US Constitution designates the president as "commander-in-chief of the army and navy"; however, it does not explicitly describe the president as having the authority to initiate hostilities on their own (such as conducting an airstrike on a foreign state's territory). Instead, the Constitution names Congress as the body with the power to officially declare a war. It's generally believed by scholars that as commander-in-chief, the POTUS not only has the power to lead the military, but can also do so without a congressional declaration of war.

A napalm strike erupts in a fireball near U.S. troops on patrol in South Vietnam, 1966 during the Vietnam War
© AP Photo /
A napalm strike erupts in a fireball near U.S. troops on patrol in South Vietnam, 1966 during the Vietnam War

In fact, the US has engaged in several conflicts without declaring war officially, although presidents have usually received authorisation from Congress to do so in advance, as was the case with the Vietnam War, the Persian Gulf War in 1991, as well as with the War on Terror that started in 2001. However, US lawmakers decided to implement additional checks on presidential powers in the form of the so-called War Powers Resolution after the country was dragged into the disastrous 20-year-long Vietnam War due to President Lyndon Johnson interpreting a congressional resolution to protect US forces as a carte blanche to engage in a full-scale war.

So How Exactly Does the US Currently Start Its Wars?

The War Powers Resolution that was adopted by Congress in 1973 requires US presidents to seek congressional approval, in the form of a declaration of war or statutory authorisation, before deploying troops to fight abroad. Since 1942, the US has actually commenced all of its hostilities without an official declaration of war, relying instead on congressional authorisation or UN Security Council resolutions – another way for the US to engage in military activities abroad.

However, the 1973 resolution did leave one path open for a president to send American troops into hostilities – if US territories, possessions, or its armed forces are attacked (merely a threat is insufficient), then the POTUS can do so without a "go" from the legislative body. But in this scenario, the president is still required to consult with Congress before deploying troops, even if "imminent involvement in hostilities" is expected. Furthermore, the POTUS also needs to explain the reasons for and the duration of the deployment of US forces into hostilities within 48 hours.

How Many of These Rules Has Trump Really Followed?

When it comes to the recent assassination of Iranian General Soleimani, Trump, for starters, never notified Congress in advance of his plan to conduct the airstrike on 3 January. Additionally, the basis for the military operation, which had the potential to drag the US into a war with Iran, remains questionable.

U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivers remarks on human rights in Iran at the State Department in Washington, U.S., December 19, 2019
© REUTERS / ERIN SCOTT
U.S. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo delivers remarks on human rights in Iran at the State Department in Washington, U.S., December 19, 2019

Trump claims that Soleimani was planning attacks against US citizens in the near future, but later, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo confessed that Washington knew neither the date nor the place of the allegedly planned attack. Even if the US had evidence suggesting that an attack was possible, technically Trump still didn't have the right to order the airstrike without a nod from Congress, as the War Powers Resolution only mentions an actual "attack" on US interests as a prerequisite for such a move.

Was Trump the First President to Ignore the War Powers Resolution?

While it does look like Trump did interpret his authority under the War Powers Resolution rather loosely, to say the least, he was not the first president to ignore the law's provisions, to the discontent of Congress.

One major instance when the resolution was violated was President Bill Clinton's use of American forces in the bombing of Yugoslavia during the Kosovo War in 1999. Back then, US troops were conducting operations in a foreign country without authorisation from either Congress or the UN Security Council and without a clear threat to American interests (let alone any "attack" on them). In addition, this deployment lasted for 78 days, or 18 days longer than the War Powers Resolution allows for without congressional approval – which had not been granted.

Serbian protesters hold a banner reading, Clinton make sex not war outside the U.S. embassy in Munich, Germany during a demonstration against NATO airstrikes in Yugoslavia, Friday, March 26, 1999.
© AP Photo / Uwe Lein
Serbian protesters hold a banner reading, "Clinton make sex not war" outside the U.S. embassy in Munich, Germany during a demonstration against NATO airstrikes in Yugoslavia, Friday, March 26, 1999.

The War Powers Resolution was also violated by Trump's predecessor, Barack Obama, who directed the US military join the campaign against Libyan air defences in 2011. While the operation was conducted under the pretext of implementing a UN Security Council-approved no-fly zone over the country, it had still not been backed by American lawmakers, some of whom expressed concern that the POTUS was abusing his status as commander-in-chief.

Obama justified his actions at the time by calling the operation necessary to "prevent a humanitarian catastrophe and address the threat" allegedly posed to "international peace and security" by the Libyan Civil War, which had largely been fuelled by Western countries themselves. He also argued that the US operations in the conflict would be "limited in their nature, duration, and scope", even though Washington actually contributed more than any other of its NATO partners to the intervention in the country.

But despite ignoring and violating the existing laws regulating when the US can enter into an armed conflict, no president has so far been directly punished for doing so, even if members of Congress have expressed their discontent. On the other hand, Trump has faced major opposition in the US Congress throughout his presidency and was recently impeached, meaning he could face something more serious than just grumbling from lawmakers. Although Democrats only control the lower chamber of Congress, Trump's actions in Iraq have made some Republican senators consider supporting their opponents' recent initiative to limit the POTUS' ability to engage in hostilities with Iran.

  • Published in World

Iran's statement on downed Ukrainian airliner

Iran said on Saturday that its armed forces had “unintentionally” shot down a Ukrainian airliner, killing all 176 passengers and crew on board.

The incident came hours after Iran launched a wave of missiles at Iraqi bases housing American troops in retaliation for the killing of Qasem Soleimani, one of Iran’s top generals, in a US drone strike.

The Iranian armed forces were first to acknowledge the error, saying the Boeing 737 had been mistaken for a “hostile target” at a time when enemy threats were at the highest level.

Following are the main elements from the five-point statement:

The armed forces said it had opened an investigation into what it called the “heartbreaking incident” after the Ukraine International Airlines plane (UIA) was brought down on Wednesday.

1. The Iranian armed forces had been on their highest level of alert after launching missiles at Iraqi bases housing US troops and following “threats by the criminal American president and military commanders.”

2. Flights by the US military had increased around Iran after the missile operation and following some reports of aerial targets moving towards “strategic centres” in the Islamic republic.

3. After taking off from Tehran’s Imam Khomeini International Airport, UIA flight PS752 turned, got close to a “sensitive military site” of the Revolutionary Guards and appeared to fly like a “hostile target.” Due to “human error“, the plane was hit, which “unfortunately led to the martyrdom of a number of our dear compatriots and loss of life of a number of foreign nationals.”

4. The statement expressed “condolences and sympathy” with the families of those who died and gave an assurance that a “repetition of such mistakes would become impossible” through changes in operational procedures. It also said the armed forces would immediately present the “culprit” to the judiciary.

5. Finally, it said “relevant officials from the Revolutionary Guards should, as soon as possible, give detailed explanations to the honourable people in the national media.”

  • Published in World

Trump-Iran: Backfiring?

When the civilized conscience of the world rejects the murder of a prestigious Iranian figure, Qasem Soleimani, Donald Trump celebrates it.

What’s more striking is that the head of the White House is proclaimed aware of such offense typically gangster-like.

This was reported on Monday from Tehran by a correspondent of the Associated France Press (AFP), Marc Jourdier.



As the journalist wrote, Trump declared: Soleimani’s bloody devastation is over after the United States struck him down.

A little later, Trump threatened Iran with "major reprisals."



When did he do it? Almost at the same time that the Iraqi Parliament voted to expel U.S. troops from its territory.



The AFP warned that after the murder of General Qasem Soleimani, the "architect of Iranian intelligence," the world fears a conflict.

He added the case of Abu Mehdi Al Muhandis, whom he called number two of a pro-Iran paramilitary coalition, Hashd al Shaabi.

The French agency also commented that Trump returned to Washington on Air Force One, after 14 days of vacation in Florida.

He did not issue statements that would ease people.



On Saturday, there was a demonstration at the Torch of Friendship, where Miami residents asked Trump to prevent a conflict with Iran.

They were referring to the president's threats to destroy 52 targets of that nation like the number of hostages during the situation in 1979 at the U.S. embassy in Baghdad.



Just hours ago, witnesses said, several rockets struck near that embassy without any casualties.



For more than two months, dozens of rockets have fallen in areas where there were U.S. diplomats and military in Iraq.

Observers insisted on preventing the murders of Soleimani and Al Muhandis from generating "an unusual agreement against the United States in Iraq."

Equivalent to say? Strengthening the domestic unity against the empire.



One of the many events surfacing from the situation in that side of the world.


Also, at the Parliament a large number of its members joined their voices to shout: "No to the United States!"

After that demonstration Trump threatened Iraq with "very large" punishments if they forces his troops out of the country.

"They will make the sanctions against Iran seem almost weak," added the president.



Donald Trump in election year only acts spurred by them, but not without backfiring results.

China blames US for destroying nuclear deal with Iran

Beijing, Jan 6 (Prensa Latina) China said on Monday that the United States pushed Iran to abandon commitments on uranium enrichment by unilaterally withdrawing from the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) in 2018.

Geng Shuang, spokesman for the Chinese Foreign Ministry, noted in a press conference that with that step, Washington not only ignored international laws and obligations, but also opted to exert maximum pressure and obstruct the efforts of the other signatories of the deal to maintain it.

He stressed that despite the hostile stance of the White House, Tehran refrained from making the situation worse and showed the political will to effectively resolve the dispute.

Shuang considered it prudent to take into account all such elements before proceeding with an analysis of the issue, to ensure that any response is rational, measured, without interference and aimed at finding a political solution.

He also emphasized that China opposes the use of force in international relations such as the recent US maneuvers in Baghdad, where Iranian General Qasem Soleimani and Abu Mahdi al-Muhandis, deputy commander of the Iraqi militia, were assassinated.

He deplored US plans to destroy 52 Iranian sites, if the Islamic Republic responds with attacks following the death of the senior officer.

  • Published in World

'35 Vital US Posts Are Within Reach of Iran', Iranian Commander

The Trump-ordered murder of Iranian General Soleimani increased the risk of military conflicts in the Strait of Hormuz, the Oman Sea, and the Persian Gulf.

Iran’s Revolutionary Guard commander Gholamali Abuhamzeh Friday warned that his country will punish the United States anywhere within the reach of the Islamic Republic in retaliation for the murder of General Qassem Soleimani.

RELATED: US Deploys 3,000 Troops to the Middle East as War Concern Grows

Abuhamzeh, who stressed that Tehran has identified vital U.S. goals in the Middle East for a long time, mentioned a series of possible targets for reprisals including the Gulf waterway through which a significant proportion of shipborne oil is exported to global markets.

"About 35 U.S. targets in the region are within our reach and Tel Aviv, which is the heart and life of the United States, is also within reach," he said.

"The Strait of Hormuz is a vital point for the West. A large number of U.S. destroyers and warships crosses the Strait of Hormuz, the Oman Sea, and the Persian Gulf."

@medeabenjamin

The Pentagon says it killed Soleimani to protect Americans. WTF??? Americans, particularly US soldiers in the Middle East, are now sitting ducks. Look at all the US military bases around Iran!!!

General Soleimani was attacked and assassinated on January 2 when vehicles carrying him and other Kataib Hezbollah militia high-ranking officers ​​​were leaving Baghdad airport. The attack was ordered by U.S. President Donald Trump.

Iran’s President Hassan Rouhani promised that his country and other nations in the region "will avenge the martyrdom of Soleimani."

Supreme religious leader Ayatollah Ali Hosseini Khamenei​​​​​​​ also affirmed that the criminals who killed the Iranian general await hard revenge.

After announcing three days of national mourning for the death of Soleimani, Khamenei appointed Brigadier General Esmail Ghaani as the new commander of the Quds Force.

Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif described the U.S. attack as an "act of international terrorism," warning that such an "extremely dangerous" action will have its consequences for the U.S.​

 

  • Published in World
Subscribe to this RSS feed