07 September, 2017
"But the deal was constructed in a way that makes leaving it less attractive". That's a day when Iran's military may very well already have the missile technology to send a nuclear warhead to the United States - a technology that North Korea only recently developed.
So regardless of whether one considers Iran's violations of the JCPOA to have been material, and regardless of whether one considers Iran's flouting of the United Nations resolution on its ballistic missile technology to be "non-nuclear", USA law requires the President to also look at whether the Iran deal is appropriate, proportionate, and in our national security interests. Haley even suggested that Iran could have hundreds of covert nuclear sites which cannot be inspected under the deal, but offered no evidence for her assertion.
Haley's remarks appeared to draw a quick response from the French ambassador to the US, Gerard Araud, who tweeted a rebuke at the Trump administration's apparent attempt to move the goalposts on the Iran deal. The speech also used more twisted versions of familiar rhetorical twists that have been heard before from diehard opponents of the JCPOA. It was a very badly-negotiated deal, led by former President Barack Obama, that left numerous loopholes open for the regime to exploit.
Iran's verified compliance with the deal's provisions resulted in the U.N. Security Council lifting an array of worldwide financial sanctions last year that had been in place for years, and the release of billions of dollars of Iranian funds that had been frozen by Western banks and governments.
"The real challenge the administration faces, however, is not identifying the weaknesses in the JCPOA, but rather determining what to do about them", said Singh, now with the Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
Under U.S. law, the State Department must notify Congress every 90 days whether Iran is in compliance with curbs on its nuclear activities required in exchange for worldwide sanctions relief under the deal.
In return, the U.S. and the European Union will suspend nuclear-related sanctions against Iran, with the lifting of all past UN Security Council sanction resolutions.
"No, they don't want us to get out of the deal", Haley acknowledged about the European allies, in a short question and answer period after her speech. "What I am saying is we owe it to ourselves to look at every aspect of this deal". This is not about European security. Pointing out that this crisis can directly endanger Japan's national security, he stressed the major role of China on resolving the situation without the need for military options.More news: Dead in Ongoing Clashes in Myanmar's Rakhine State
"You can't put lipstick on a pig", Haley added.
Instead of sloughing off a threat that makes Hurricane Harvey look like an overflowing bathtub, this oversight duty must be taken far more seriously. "The deal is flawed". But in the last known inspection of a military site, the agency allowed Iranian personnel to do that work under limited conditions two years ago at Parchin, a facility where the agency suspects Iranian scientists worked in the past on atomic arms.
"Congress could debate whether the nuclear deal is in fact too big to fail", she said.
Every six months, the United Nations secretary general reports to the Security Council on the Iranian regime's compliance with this so-called "non-nuclear" resolution.
There were several flat-out mistakes in Haley's remarks, noted former member of the United States nuclear negotiating team Richard Nephew, who went to the trouble of cataloguing them.
"The Iran deal is about the nuclear issue, nothing else", Araud tweeted. "So far, Iran is abiding by the commitments taken in this mutually agreed framework".
"We must consider the regime's repeated, demonstrated hostility toward the United States", said Haley. "In short, we must consider the whole picture, not simply whether Iran has exceeded the JCPOA's limit on uranium enrichment".
"If it goes back on his desk, it's probably the end of the nuclear deal", Goldenberg said.