Obama Folds To Iran (Again), Will Delay New Sanctions After Rouhani Threat
On Thursday, we detailed the Obama administration’s plan to impose fresh sanctions on Iran in connection with the test-firing of Tehran’s next-generation, surface-to-surface ballistic missile the Emad back in October.
While the launch did not technically violate the nuclear accord (on which the ink is barely dry), it did run afoul of a UN Security Council resolution on developing and testing missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads. That prompted some US lawmakers to call for new penalties against the country just as international sanctions are set to be lifted.
The new measures reportedly target around a dozen companies and individuals with ties to Tehran’s ballistic missiles program including:
- U.A.E.-based Mabrooka Trading and its founder, Hossein Pournaghshband
- Hong Kong-based Anhui Land Group
- Five officials from Iran’s Ministry of Defense for Armed Forces Logistics, or MODAFL including Sayyed Javad Musavi, a key figure at a MODAFL subsidiary which has been the subject of Treasury Dept. sanctions in the past
Iran immediately responded, calling the sanctions “arbitrary and illegal.” As a reminder, the Iranians vigorously defend their right to pursue what they call “defensive” capabilities. Tehran says its missile program falls into that category.
For his part, President Hassan Rouhani was not pleased and ordered his defence minister to immediately expand Iran's missile programme. This is precisely what we warned would happen on the heels of the Emad launch when we said the following:
“..imposing sanctions on countries in order to deter their defense buildup (Iran) or otherwise force them into acting in a way that fits your definition of being an internationally responsible country (Russia) is a fool's errand to the extent that it only serves to aggravate the situation and perpetuates still more of the very same behavior you're trying to deter in the first place."
Of course the more immediate question for The White House was whether the new sanctions would derail the nuclear accord which, as regular readers are no doubt aware, is a rather important part of Obama’s legacy. John McCain - among others - have accused the administration of tolerating incessant Iranian sabre rattling in a desperate attempt to preserve the deal. “Strict, aggressive, and consistent enforcement is critical to punishing Iran for its destabilizing behavior and making the nuclear deal work,” McCain said, in the wake of an “incident” in the Strait of Hormuz involving what Washington says was a “close call” with Iranian rockets.
In a move that will almost certainly infuriate GOP lawmakers, The White House has decided to mothball the new sanctions. “The White House has delayed its plan to impose new financial sanctions on Iran for its ballistic missile program,” WSJ reports, citing US officials. The move comes “amid growing tensions with Iran over the nuclear deal struck earlier this year,” The Journal adds. Here’s more:
U.S. officials offered no definitive timeline for when the sanctions would be imposed after the decision was made Wednesday to delay them. At one point, they were scheduled to be announced Wednesday morning in Washington, according to a notification the White House sent to Congress.
Republican leaders on Thursday accused the Obama administration of losing its will to challenge Iran after Tehran countered on Thursday that it would accelerate the development of its arsenal.
“If the president’s announced sanctions ultimately aren’t executed, it would demonstrate a level of fecklessness that even the president hasn’t shown before,” said Rep. Mike Pompeo (R., Kan.), a leading critic of the nuclear deal, in an interview.
Critics of the planned sanctions had already charged they weren’t an adequate U.S. response to Iran’s continuing development of its missile program.
President Hassan Rouhani said Thursday morning on Twitter that he had instructed Iran’s Ministry of Defense to accelerate the development of ballistic missiles in response to the news reports of the impending U.S. sanctions.
The State Department was keen to note that the decision was not in any way related to Rouhani's comments. In a hilariously absurd testament to just how indecisive the current administration has become, Obama was apparently ready to announce the sanctions at 10:30 a.m. on Wednesday, then got cold feet and pushed the announcement back "a few hours" before cancelling it altogether. Here's The Times again:
The White House on Wednesday morning sent a notification to Congress that the Treasury Department would announce at 10:30 a.m. new sanctions on nearly a dozen companies and individuals in Iran, Hong Kong and the United Arab Emirates for their alleged role in developing Iran’s ballistic missile program. The sanctions would have been the first imposed on Iran since the nuclear agreement was reached last July in Vienna.
The White House then sent a second email to congressional offices at 11:12 a.m. stating the sanctions announcement had been “delayed for a few hours,” according to a copy of the communications seen by The Wall Street Journal.
In a final White House email sent just after 10 p.m., officials said the sanctions had been delayed, and didn’t specify when they might go ahead.
It's unclear what exactly unfolded between say, 9 a.m. Wednesday morning and lunchtime, but it seems logical to assume that someone conveyed Iran's position to the administration and, upon learning that Rouhani (not to mention the Ayatollah) were about to blow a fuse, Obama simply called the whole thing off.
Needless to say, this will be trotted out endlessly as further evidence that America has become weak, that the President "leads from behind," and that the nuclear was indeed "historic" - a "historic" failure.
On that note, we close with two statements, one from The White House and one from Rouhani. Compare and contrast.
The White House: "We are considering various aspects related to additional designations, as well as evolving diplomatic work that is consistent with our national security interests, and as such we will not be announcing any additional designations today."
Rouhani: "We have never negotiated regarding our defense capabilities including our missile program and will not accept any restrictions in this regard."
(14 votes)
»
- Login or register to post comments
- Printer-friendly version
- Send to friend
- advertisements -
Economic malaise - check
Tax increases - check
Over regulation - check
Weakened military - check
Debt increased - check
Social programs expanded - check
Jobs lost - check
Weak foreign policy - obama must still think Jimmy Carter is ahead in the race for worst president ever!
If we had Hitler or Pol Pot for president, Obunghole would still win top honors for worst president ever, by a *wide* margin...
What's wrong with allowing Iran to have nukes?
Nothing, but don't let your media oligarchs know you know that.
IF they actually HAD ANY nukes, they would make good protection against ISRAEL
The next President will forgo d'etente.
It is good to have dogs guarding the sheep, so that the sheep may eat grass and grow fat and hairy without fear of wolves.
It is not good to let the sheep vote, for one sheep will say, "What is the difference between a dog and wolf, they look the same to me! Elect me as your leader and I'll tell those mean dogs to stop bossing us around!"
Folding is what he does best, freaking homosexual origami negro...
Reality settling in ?
http://thepeninsulaqatar.com/news/middle-east/364541/saudi-arabia-reopen...
BAGHDAD: Saudi Arabia has reopened its embassy in Baghdad, after a 25-year shutdown, which will allow the two countries to cooperate more closely against terrorism, al-Arabiya TV reported on Friday.
The kingdom closed its embassy in Baghdad in 1990, after the Iraqi invasion of Kuwait.
Its reopening will allow the two countries to cooperate on security and the fight against extremism, the new Saudi ambassador to Iraq, Thamer al-Sabhan, told al-Arabiya.
A thaw in the once chilly relations between Sunni Muslim-ruled Saudi Arabia and Shi’ite-led Iraq could help strengthen a regional alliance against Islamic State militants who have seized territory in Iraq and Syria.
Saudi Arabia has long accused Iraq of being too close to Shi’ite Iran, its main regional rival, and of encouraging sectarian discrimination against Sunnis, a charge Baghdad denies.
i don't think the saudis appreciated their ally, israel, throwing them under a bus by trying to make them the isis bogeyman when it is israel and the dc zionazis who are most responsible. the saudis were duped into being the go between with isis for them. besides, the saudis needed to be thrown under a bus for taking yuan in payment for oil.
The Saudis deserve to be thrown under the bus, putting our shale out of business, and our leaders all too happy just to poke the Russians in the eye going along with it. On another front, thousands of Syrian christians dead and then the living denied refugee status here because they were not being supressed or persecuted by Assad is an Irony and disgraceful statement of our times. If I were driving that bus, I would have put it in reverse after running them over.
Who cares? For a generally libertarian site, ZH sure worries about the Iranians a lot. They're not going to attack the US, and if they feeling like tangling with Israel, they can be my guest.
I agree, the last thing we need now while the chess board is being reset is another Gulf of Tonkin resolution or stupid false flag to appease the warhawks. Looks like an internal power struggle ,some people are trying their best to pigeon hole the POTUS, and like the nerve gas debacle that had us on the brink the last time. it failed. This is not just a being punked out..Soros sliming out of his hole and saying he is not happy with him is no accident.. clear sign that if the war whore Hillary gets in she will, and thats what all the clowns except Trump are advocating..they sound exactly alike..no difference at all..
Communist Iranian Valerie Jarrett has a tight grip on Obama`s reins........
Barry is a fuckup with less then a year to do more damage.
Teheran knows full-well that having a nuclear capability is just about the only way of avoiding American "Regime Management" - they see and hear all the diatribe re. North Korea, but also notice the complete absence of ANY meaningful action re. the same country. Conclusion? Want to avoid US interference? Acquire or develop nuclear weapons, and the means to deliver them, which is why the "operational camaraderie" between Teheran and Moscow is such a problem for the US and "elsewhere" in the ME.
The reality is, the US is not particularly worried about development of a relatively short-range weapon system, but "a certain other" ME country with a track record of interference most certainly is, because such development would certainly crimp said "other country's" plans for expansion and "asset confiscation".
America's regime management is decided in Israel, the Land Of Laundered Blood Money. DO YOU SEE THE ISRAEL DUAL CITIZENS IN GOVT SEATS? That is called a COUP. Israel is killing the host while spending it into oblivion via military and economic decisions sending it's citizens into debt slave status.
Get it right.
so i take it you beleive in the tooth fairy, along with LOL "Irans Nuclear Cabability" ? Same old Liberal lies
Ditherer in Chief
we have absolutely no gaddamn reason to fuck with Iran (or Russia, for that matter) so, a case of unintended GOOD