Quantcast

Nuclear disagreements and European bitterness

Home"columnists"Nuclear disagreements and European bitterness
4 Partages

 

 

Désaccords nucléaires et amertume européenne

 

Nuclear disagreements and European bitterness

T

It took only a few hours, last Tuesday, for the exit of the United States from the nuclear agreement with Iran provokes a trance-bordering emotion in the ruling circles of France and in the small world of micro , cameras and experts that serves as a pendant.

The same phenomenon occurred on December 6, when America decided to recognize that the Israeli administration was indeed located in Jerusalem, which made it ipso facto the capital of Israel.

 

As everyone agrees that anger is not a good counselor, it is better to revisit the reality of the facts to dispel it.

 

First misconception, Trump tells us we have returned to the commitments of an agreement signed by his country, but also by Russia, China, Germany, the European Union, etc. The truth is that this agreement has never been SIGNED by anyone, not the least sign, not the slightest ceremony. Why? Because the president at the time, Barack Obama knew that his agreement would be rejected by the US Senate, in charge according to the constitutional procedure of ratification of treaties. The Senate did not want this text at all, like the overwhelming majority of Americans at the time. The agreement was not signed by Iran either, the college of mullahs religiously refusing to treat openly, under the eyes of Allah, with the Great Satan, even if the thinness of his finances made him daily draw the devil by the tail. The JCPOA (Joint Complete Plan Of Action) was born in dissimulation.

 

As the agreement had to be given some international legitimacy, the agreed text was fully incorporated into Security Council Resolution 2231, adopted unanimously on 20 July 2015, just six days after the end of the negotiations. . But the next day, Iran made it known that it would not respect this resolution, to the stupor of the naive. Why? Simply because provisions had been added to the JCPOA by Westerners in the resolution (Annex B, point 3), which prohibited any Iranian activity relating to ballistic missiles that could carry nuclear weapons.

 

This means that since July 20, 2015, Iran has violated every day, without hiding anything, the unanimous resolution of the Security Council. A strange amnesia reigns over this original breach, even more severe that of remembering the genocide of Armenian Christians in Reccep Tayyip Erdogan's brain.

 

The second misconception Endlessly, the Iranians respected the agreement of July 14, 2015. We must think for a moment. The purpose of the agreement was to prohibit Iran from developing a military nuclear arsenal. What does such an arsenal consist of? It takes a fissile fuel, uranium or plutonium of a certain grade, the integration of fuel into a warhead with a suitable detonator, this is called the "militarization"of the weapon, and missiles to send the bomb on his target.

 

What did Iran do after July 14, 2015? It has devoted all its resources to the development of missiles of the ICBM (Intercontinental Balistic Missile) type to "deliver" the bomb and to the difficult militarization of the weapon, knowing that the hemispherical machining of the warhead and the setting at the point of detonation systems are very technical operations.

 

And to mask this decisive activity for the conclusion of his nuclear program, he located the famous operations of militarization in the enclosures of selected military bases. And he banned IAEA inspectors from access to these military bases. Not very subtle but effective with those who love to see nothing.

 

In fact since July 14, 2015, Iran is just mastering the technologies it lacked to successfully complete its long march towards the ultimate weapon. So either Mr. Le Drian is blind and ignorant, who would believe it, or he behaves in tartufe in front of the French by repeating that Iran respects its commitments.

 

But will it be said, Iran has not stopped the enrichment of uranium? No doubt, at least in the sites where he wants to grant access to the IAEA. But his juicers, he always has them, stopped but properly stored, ready to use, in his warehouses; the enrichment techniques he already possesses. And as the Obama agreement overseen by our national Fabius is well done, it allows Iran to continue its research on centrifuges. What he did not fail to do. It now has IR8 centrifuges, ie four times more powerful than the IR1 and IR2 2015. It will take four times less time to obtain the desired fuel.

 

This is clearly what Iran has been striving to do since 2015: to acquire ICBM technology, to control the militarization of the atomic warhead, and to modernize its panoply of centrifuges. Who would see there the slightest relation with the continuation of a military nuclear program? No doubt no one, neither at the Élysée nor at the Quai d'Orsay.

 

We will pass on the inspections of the IAEA, a tartuferie in itself in the tartuferie. The secret nuclear programs of the countries adhering to the Non-Proliferation Treaty, under the control of the IAEA, are known in two ways: either when, to the general surprise, a country detonates its bomb (Pakistan, India), or when the secret sites are revealed to the press by opposition groups (Iran). North Korea, on the other hand, invited the inspectors to visit her to let her know how far she was, and what a high price it was necessary to pay for her consent to take a break.

 

The supreme tartuferie of the JCPOA of Obama is to have planned a secret agreement between the IAEA and Iran, secret even vis-à-vis the United States (!!), to establish the state of exact progress of the previous program, and calculate from there the time necessary to reach the phase of the "nuclear jump". And the Obamo-Fabiusian diplomacy to produce a sidereal innovation, self inspection. Thus, the inspector, Iran, provided the inspectors with the inspection documents himself.

 

President Macron has said a lot, and his minister has said a lot, that if Trump does not get the agreement, France and the Europeans will keep the agreement and try to expand it to missiles and aggressive behavior. Iran in the region. This is an excellent prospect, because as implied by Donald Trump May 8, Iran may well want to furiously in a few months this kind of way out of the crisis.

 

Only this perspective is precisely the approach that had been explicitly demanded by Trump himself, in a previous speech where he left until May to the Europeans to conclude: "Today, I give up the application of certain nuclear sanctions, but only to obtain the assent of our European allies to correct the terrible flaws in the Iranian nuclear deal. " It was January 12, 2018. Macron discovered Trump's request late and claimed to be the author of this good idea. All narcissism aside, it's a welcome initiative.

 

What is much more worrying is to want to mount a Euro-Iranian front against America. Iran's strategy, of course, is to divide Westerners. It is appalling to see the May-Macron-Merkel trio fall into the trap for a few small handfuls of dollars. (EU trade with Iran accounts for 0.5% of the total).

 

Their attitude would be understandable on two conditions.

 

The first would they really believe that Iran has given up holding a military nuclear arsenal. However one takes the problem, everything shows that in reality, on the contrary, Iran is doing everything to obtain this arsenal. In addition to the elements presented above, the fierce desire to maintain intact nuclear infrastructures instead of dismantling, the first European requirement before Obama interfered with the issue, showed their intention. Their refusal to negotiate the end date of the suspension of uranium enrichment is another proof. The non-transformation of the Arak heavy water reactor into a light water reactor, a rape of agreement, is further proof.

 

The second condition which should guide the Europeans is the evolution of the Iranian regime. Is he being less aggressive, less expansionist, more cooperative with his neighbors? Is he more interested in the needs of his people, the development of the civil economy, the introduction of a minimum of democratic breathing?

 

It's quite the opposite ! Iran's nuclear deal has ignited the fires of war throughout the Middle East since 2015, it has been the savior of the scarecrow of Europe, Bashar Assad, and it is now implanting everywhere in Syria and in Lebanon buried bases of high-precision missiles, preparing with Israel a new "war in war."

 

When to the Iranian people, nothing can describe their collapse. Behind Rouhani, the "moderate" sex cache, we hang and perform like never before. The water distribution infrastructure, which dates from the old regime and sometimes even antiquity, is in ruins, returning whole regions to aridity. This is one of the reasons for the sudden outbreak of revolt last December. It sometimes seems that the Iranian people, whose fertility has plummeted in forty years as never before in human history, is too weakened to even rebel. Emmanuel Macron should remember that in the fall, when he dared to discuss a negotiation on the Iranian ballistic program, the Iranian generals courteously let him know that if they persisted in his demands, they would be forced to lengthen the range of their test missiles.

 

It must also be understood in the West that the Iranian power is not a Shiite power, but that of a semi-mafia phalanx without legitimacy. Khomeini's doctrine is not shared by the great doctors of the Shiite faith, for example by the most eminent of them, the Iraqi ayatollah Ali al-Sistani. According to this doctrine, the most learned of the doctors of the faith must exercise the power while waiting for the return of occultation of the 12th Imam, because it is to him that God provisionally entrusts the authority. His power, his status as "source of imitation", is due to his superior knowledge of the Sharia. But Khomeini's theology says nothing about the appointment process of the holder of power. He himself seized it on the occasion of a revolution. Which was not very Catholic, very Shia rather. Only his title of Ayatollah has a little legitimized.

 

As for Khamenei, the present Guide, he was only an intermediate cleric (hojjatol islam). His legitimacy as a guide in religion was recognized by a political body, the Assembly of Experts, packed with his supporters by Khomeini, but not by a religious body. High-ranking jurists and clerics never recognized him because they should have obeyed him when they considered him an ignoramus. The great ayatollahs, Montazeri and Youssef Sanei, defied his authority and were placed under house arrest. The religious legitimacy of Khamenei does not exist.

 

Deprived of God's investment, Khamenei has developed a purely totalitarian system, the most down-to-earth, made of dark networks at every level of society, covering more or less occult religious functions, administrative , military, etc. Having his head close to the cap, he appropriated a huge conglomerate, Sedat, which today represents nearly 100 billion dollars. In the same way, the generals of his Praetorian Guard, the Guardians of the Revolution, took control of all sectors of the economy. These incompetent predators paralyze the dynamics that the ingenious Persian entrepreneurs could impulse.

 

The nature of the Iranian regime, warmongering and expansionist outside, predator and asphyxiating inside, is adrift, forever. He draws a spark of life only from military adventure, and from the many Satans he invents to control the anger of his people.

 

May Macron, the European trio, does Merkel really believe that this kind of regime is going to subside and improve? Does he have the slightest chance of initiating a cycle of development, of becoming an industrial and commercial partner, while his living forces, the educated youth, deserts en masse the totalitarian hell he promises?

 

What is sorely lacking in the European trio is to think of the Iranian people, to speak about the Iranian people, to speak to the Iranian people. Whatever one's perception of Donald Trump's personality, one can not take away the merit of always talking about the Iranian people, and the Iranian people, when he makes a speech about Iran.

 

Jean-Pierre Bensimon

May 10, 2018

 

 

 

Désaccords nucléaires et amertume européenne

4 Partages

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your data is processed .

Social Media Auto Publish Powered By: XYZScripts.com
en_USEnglish
fr_FRFrançais en_USEnglish