This article is from the source 'nytimes' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at https://www.nytimes.com/2019/05/08/us/politics/iran-nuclear-deal.html

The article has changed 12 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 7 Version 8
U.S. Issues New Sanctions as Iran Warns It Will Step Back From Nuclear Deal U.S. Threatens New Sanctions as Iran Plans to End Compliance With Parts of Nuclear Deal
(32 minutes later)
WASHINGTON — Iran’s president declared on Wednesday that he would begin to walk away from the restrictions of a 2015 nuclear deal, and the Trump administration responded with a new round of sanctions against Tehran, reviving a crisis that had been contained for the past four years. WASHINGTON — Iran’s president declared on Wednesday that the country would stop complying with two of its commitments under the Iranian nuclear deal, pushing the growing confrontation between Washington and Tehran into new and potentially dangerous territory.
The escalation of threats caught the United States’ allies in Europe in the crossfire between Washington and Tehran. And while the announcement by President Hassan Rouhani of Iran did not terminate the landmark nuclear accord that was negotiated by world powers, it put it on life support. The announcement by President Hassan Rouhani came exactly a year after President Trump withdrew entirely from the 2015 agreement, which limited Iran’s capacity to produce nuclear fuel for 15 years.
Britain, France and Germany all opposed President Trump’s move a year ago to withdraw the United States from the accord that limited Iran’s capacity to produce nuclear fuel for 15 years. Ever since, the Trump administration has ramped up a pressure campaign against Iran’s clerical leaders, including blocking global oil exports and expediting battleships and fighter jets to the Persian Gulf this week to face down what officials described, without evidence, as a new threat by Tehran against American troops in the Middle East. But Mr. Rouhani did not follow Mr. Trump’s path and renounce the entire agreement. Instead, he notified European nations that he was taking some carefully calibrated steps, and that he would give Europe 60 days to choose between following Mr. Trump or saving the deal by engaging in oil trade with Iran in violation of American unilateral sanctions.
European officials had promised to set up a bartering system to evade American sanctions imposed against Iranian oil. But that effort has largely failed, even as Iran complied with its obligations under the agreement, from production limits to inspections.
In a speech on Wednesday morning in Tehran, Mr. Rouhani declared he had run out of patience.
“The path we have chosen today is not the path of war, it is the path of diplomacy,” he said in a nationally broadcast speech. “But diplomacy with a new language and a new logic.”“The path we have chosen today is not the path of war, it is the path of diplomacy,” he said in a nationally broadcast speech. “But diplomacy with a new language and a new logic.”
Rather than exit the deal entirely, Mr. Rouhani announced a series of small steps to resume the production of nuclear centrifuges and to begin accumulating nuclear material. Secretary of State Mike Pompeo called Iran’s announcement “intentionally ambiguous.”
Mr. Rouhani also set a series of carefully calibrated deadlines for European leaders — essentially forcing them to either join the United States in isolating Iran or uphold the nuclear deal that world powers spent years negotiating with Tehran. “We have to wait and see what Iran’s actions actually are,” Mr. Pompeo said at a news conference in London with his British counterpart, Jeremy Hunt.
He said the Europeans had 60 days to assure that Iran could “reap our benefits” under the nuclear accord, by making up for lost oil revenues and allowing the country back into the international financial system. But the Trump administration is already planning to issue a new set of sanctions against Iran to further devastate its economy and to pressure the clerical government in Tehran into negotiating a new nuclear agreement. Many believe that the administration is far more interested in forcing Iran’s leaders from power as a result of the economic pressure.
If the Europeans agree, they will be subject to sanctions by the United States. If they dismiss Mr. Rouhani’s claims, he says Iran will take more dramatic steps. A White House official, Tim Morrison, said new sanctions against Iran would be announced “very soon.”
Hours later, the White House announced that it was taking additional measures to squeeze Iran’s economy by imposing sanctions on its steel, aluminum, iron and copper sectors. Iran’s industrial metals industries account for about 10 percent of its exports, according to a Trump administration estimate. “Iran has a choice,” Mr. Morrison, the National Security Council’s arms control director, told a conference organized by the Foundation for the Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think-tank. “At some point, even the mullahs will get it.”
Mr. Trump said in a statement that the move “puts other nations on notice that allowing Iranian steel and other metals into your ports will no longer be tolerated.” Mr. Rouhani said that starting on Wednesday, Iran would begin to build up its stockpiles of low enriched uranium and of heavy water, which is used in nuclear reactors — including a reactor that could give Iran a source of bomb-grade plutonium. If the Europeans fail to compensate for the unilateral American sanctions, he said, Iran will resume construction of the Arak nuclear reactor, a facility that was shut down, and its key components dismantled, under the deal.
Under John R. Bolton, the national security adviser who has long advocated pressing for regime change in Iran, the White House has been urging ever-escalating sanctions. Mr. Rouhani then threatened a potentially more severe step. If the Europeans do not find a way to help Iran “reap our benefits,” especially in petroleum exports and banking transactions, in 60 days Iran will end the limits on the enrichment of uranium, he said. Currently, it is enriching small amounts, and only to a level of 3.67 percent, which is suitable for nuclear power plants — but not for nuclear weapons.
“Iran has a choice,” Tim Morrison, the National Security Council’s arms control director, said at a conference organized by the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a Washington-based think tank. “At some point, even the mullahs will get it.” Without economic progress, he said, “we will not consider any limit” on enrichment, suggesting that it could rise to levels closer to something that could be used in weapons. Iran has never been known to produce weapons-grade material.
At the State Department, officials said the United States was willing to reopen nuclear negotiations with Iran, as long as the talks were broadened to include possible limits on missile launches and the country’s support of armed militias and terrorist groups. Mr. Rouhani and his diplomats have made clear that the United States must first return to the 2015 deal before entering any new negotiations. China, a signatory to the accord, urged restraint on all sides but put the blame for the confrontation on Washington, which it said had escalated tensions. At a press briefing, Geng Shuang, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, praised Iran for adhering to the nuclear agreement that Mr. Trump has abandoned, and reiterated his country’s endorsement of the agreement and opposition to United States sanctions against Iran.
In London, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, who has been among the most vocal of the Iran hawks in the Trump administration, initially played down the Iranian announcement as “intentionally ambiguous.” Russia’s foreign minister, Sergey V. Lavrov, at a meeting in Moscow with Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister, complained about the “unacceptable situation” created by the “irresponsible behavior of the United States,” but did not respond directly to Mr. Rouhani’s comments.
Later, however, he issued a blistering statement that denounced Iran’s action as “in defiance of international norms and a blatant attempt to hold the world hostage.” The Trump administration’s withdrawal from the nuclear deal has led to a wide rift on Iran policy with European allies, who are still sticking to the agreement and have urged Tehran to uphold it.
Iran’s “threat to renew nuclear work that could shorten the time to develop a nuclear weapon underscores the continuing challenge the Iranian regime poses to peace and security worldwide,” Mr. Pompeo said. European officials have told the Trump administration that the deal is helpful in curbing Iran’s nuclear ambitions and has given Western nations leverage on other matters that could be negotiated, including Iran’s ballistic missile program.
None of the actions that Mr. Rouhani warned of would get Iran to a nuclear weapon anytime soon. But they would resume a slow, steady march that the 2015 agreement temporarily stopped. “Today nothing would be worse than Iran, itself, leaving this agreement,” said Florence Parly, the French defense minister, on the BFM TV news channel.
Jeremy Hunt, the British foreign secretary, agreed that Iran must be prevented from developing a way to build a nuclear weapon. Heiko Maas, Germany’s foreign minister, stressed that Berlin wanted to stay in the agreement and encouraged Tehran to do the same.
He added, however, that “it’s no secret we have a different approach on how best to achieve that.” Britain is still adhering to the nuclear deal. “We want Iran to remain in the agreement and are ready to continue this path, together with the other partners,” he said. “For this, it is important that Iran continues to uphold the established formats and mechanisms of the nuclear agreement.”
The nuclear accord with Iran was brokered under the Obama administration, in partnership with Britain, France, Germany, China and Russia. It limited Tehran’s nuclear program in exchange for easing international economic penalties that had crippled Iran’s economy. Mr. Trump’s withdrawal from the deal, and the restarting of the sanctions, has put huge domestic pressure on Mr. Rouhani to strike back at the United States. Brian Hook, the State Department’s special representative for Iran, acknowledged that American and European allies were at odds over the nuclear deal. But he insisted that European allies agreed that Iran has more broadly enacted harmful policies in the Middle East.
European officials have been the most critical of Mr. Trump’s approach, arguing that as long as the Iranians were remaining faithful to their commitments — as international inspectors attested — there was no basis for reimposing sanctions. They have also pointed to Iran’s compliance in shipping 97 percent of its nuclear fuel out of the country as helpful in curbing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions.
In turn, European officials have said, Western nations have had more leverage with Iran when discussing other security concerns, including its ballistic missile program.
“Today nothing would be worse than Iran, itself, leaving this agreement,” Florence Parly, the French defense minister, said on the BFM TV news channel.
Heiko Maas, Germany’s foreign minister, stressed that Berlin wanted to stay in the agreement — but suggested that Iran must resist internal calls to withdraw as the United States did, even if its exports are being cut off.
“We want Iran to remain in the agreement and are ready to continue this path, together with the other partners,” Mr. Maas said. “For this, it is important that Iran continues to uphold the established formats and mechanisms of the nuclear agreement.”
Mr. Rouhani said that if no progress was made with Europe, he would order scientists in July to ignore current limits on enriching uranium as set in the 2015 accord. Currently those limits are so low that the fuel could be used only in a nuclear power plant, not a weapons program.
Mr. Rouhani also threatened to restart work on the Arak reactor in Iran that produces plutonium, another pathway to a bomb. If the country plunged back into uranium and plutonium production, it would almost certainly force a recalculation of how long it would take Iran to build a nuclear weapon.
If Iran begins carrying out Mr. Rouhani’s threats in early July, it would essentially resume activity that the 2015 nuclear accord had pushed off to 2030. That would almost certainly revive debate in the United States over possible military action, or a resumption of covert action, like the cyberattack on Iran’s centrifuges a decade ago that the United States and Israel secretly conducted together.
The heightened tensions have put the Pentagon in a bind.
Even as they were responding to new warnings about new Iranian threats, military officials said they were also seeking a way to de-escalate tensions and prevent a direct confrontation between Iran and the United States.
Senior national security officials are set to discuss next steps on Iran at a meeting scheduled for this week. One official familiar with the plans said representatives of the Defense Department were expected to outline the consequences and costs of war with Iran in what he described as “terms that the Potus would understand,” using the acronym for president of the United States.
In private meetings, military officials have warned the White House that its maximum-pressure campaign against Iran is motivating the kinds of threats to United States troops and American interests in the Middle East that led to an announcement on Sunday that the U.S.S. Abraham Lincoln aircraft carrier strike group and B-52 bombers were heading to the gulf.
Even though it was described by the Trump administration as a precautionary measure, the expedited deployment of the carrier strike group renewed an argument among the world powers that negotiated the nuclear deal over whether the White House was baiting the Iranians into violating its terms.
China urged restraint on all sides but put the blame for the confrontation on Washington, which it said had escalated tensions. At a press briefing, Geng Shuang, a Foreign Ministry spokesman, praised Iran for adhering to the nuclear agreement after Mr. Trump abandoned it, and reiterated China’s endorsement of the accord and opposition to United States sanctions against Iran.
China is Iran’s largest oil buyer and has been increasing its purchases this year, contrary to Trump administration demands that it gradually bring the imports to zero.
At a meeting in Moscow with the Iranian foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, Russia’s top diplomat, Sergey V. Lavrov, complained about the “unacceptable situation” created by the “irresponsible behavior of the United States.”
Brian Hook, the State Department’s special representative for Iran, acknowledged on Wednesday that American and European allies were at odds over the nuclear deal. But he insisted that European allies agreed that Iran had more broadly enacted harmful policies in the Middle East.
He also said a main aim of the Trump administration’s hard-line approach was to contain Iran’s “expansionist foreign policy,” primarily its support for Shiite militias that have allowed Tehran to exert political influence across the region.He also said a main aim of the Trump administration’s hard-line approach was to contain Iran’s “expansionist foreign policy,” primarily its support for Shiite militias that have allowed Tehran to exert political influence across the region.
If Iran begins carrying out Mr. Rouhani’s threats in early July, it could put the country on the pathway to a bomb, essentially resuming activity that the 2015 nuclear accord pushed off to 2030. That would almost certainly revive debate in the United States over possible military action, or a resumption of covert action, like the cyberattack on Iran’s centrifuges a decade ago that the United States and Israel secretly conducted together.
None of the actions that Mr. Rouhani warned of would get Iran to a nuclear weapon anytime soon. But they would resume a slow, steady march that the 2015 agreement temporarily stopped.
Mr. Rouhani’s announcement marked another sharp blow to an agreement that President Barack Obama hoped would end 40 years of hostility between the two countries, and which he bet could open a new era of cooperation. While Iran scrupulously followed the deal, that cooperation never happened: Iran continued to test missiles — which were not covered in the arrangement — and to fund Shiite militias in the region and the government of Bashar al-Assad in Syria.
Mr. Trump threatened to kill what he called the “worst deal in history,” and over the objections of several of his advisers he withdrew from it exactly a year ago. He complained that it was too narrow, and that the 15-year limit on Iran producing nuclear fuel simply kicked the problems down the road. Advocates of the arrangement said those provisions bought vital time, delaying a program that otherwise might have resulted in an Iranian bomb in just a year.
While the United States abandoned its side of the nuclear deal, it has long demanded that Iran fulfill its commitments to international inspections and moratoriums on nuclear work. The national security adviser, John Bolton, a fierce opponent of the deal, has often said that Iran never intended to give up its nuclear ambitions — and he may cite Mr. Rouhani’s speech as further evidence.
Mr. Rouhani invited all participants in the deal to rejoin negotiations. But he said the 2015 agreement must be the basis for such talks, a position the Trump administration has rejected.
Some analysts said the Trump administration’s policies on Iran, particularly the withdrawal from the nuclear deal, had jeopardized American efforts to constrain Tehran’s nuclear program.Some analysts said the Trump administration’s policies on Iran, particularly the withdrawal from the nuclear deal, had jeopardized American efforts to constrain Tehran’s nuclear program.
“It’s pretty much brought all costs and no benefits in terms of U.S. interests,” said Dalia Dassa Kaye, the director of the Center for Middle East Public Policy at RAND Corporation, a research group in Santa Monica, Calif. “We not only disrupted an international arms agreement that Iran was complying with, we’re also getting into a rift with our European allies. And we’re moving Iran closer to Russia.” “It’s pretty much brought all costs and no benefits in terms of U.S. interests,” said Dalia Dassa Kaye, director of the Center for Middle East Public Policy at RAND Corporation, a research group in Santa Monica, Calif. “We not only disrupted an international arms agreement that Iran was complying with, we’re also getting into a rift with our European allies. And we’re moving Iran closer to Russia.”
“It was not perfect, but it contained the nuclear issue for a while,” she added. “Now we’re threatening our ability to contain the nuclear issue.”“It was not perfect, but it contained the nuclear issue for a while,” she added. “Now we’re threatening our ability to contain the nuclear issue.”
While Iran’s decision Wednesday did not terminate the landmark nuclear accord, it left it on life support.
In an effort to contrast their behavior with Mr. Trump’s, Iran’s leaders have for now rejected calls that they, too, terminate the agreement. Instead, for the past year Tehran has remained fully in compliance, according to inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency.
But domestically, the failure to gain sanctions relief has put huge pressure on Mr. Rouhani to strike back at the United States.
The decision came just days after the Trump administration said it was moving bombers and a carrier group into the Persian Gulf as a warning to Iran, after intercepting intelligence that attacks on the United States forces by militias with ties to Iran might be in the offing. On an unannounced trip to Iraq on Tuesday, Mr. Pompeo told reporters he had discussed with Iraqi officials the “threat stream we had seen” from Tehran.
At the news conference in London on Wednesday, Mr. Hunt, the British foreign secretary, said that Britain, which is still adhering to the nuclear deal, was also determined to prevent Iran from developing a way to build a nuclear weapon. He added, however, “it’s no secret we have a different approach on how best to achieve that.”