It is a part of the duplicity and self-serving logic of US imperialism.
If one goes by the “Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” (JCPOA) regarding Iran’s nuclear programme issued by the United States Department of State on 2 April, then surely, from Washington’s point of view, the foundations upon which the final text of the JCPOA will be drafted by 30 June have been secured. But, of course, as the world’s foremost imperialist power never fails to reiterate, “Nothing is agreed until everything is agreed.”
All the world’s self-anointed strategic affairs pundits, whether conservative or liberal, assume that, even after 2003, Iran was pursuing the making of a nuclear weapon. So, with the “parameters” for a JCPOA now in place, they are endlessly debating whether (or not) the agreement will “cut off all of Iran’s pathways to a bomb,” as US President Barack Obama has claimed. Without conceding the very assumption on which the whole debate is based, let us nevertheless look at the “parameters” for the JCPOA.
But before doing this, we must acknowledge the change of tactics that US imperialism has been employing since 2013 in dealing with Iran. Washington’s unrelenting hostility towards Tehran has given way to a degree of composure, even as its main ally in West Asia, Israel, continues in the same vein as before, with Benjamin Netanyahu railing against the agreement. The rise of the Islamic State (IS) has brought about a significant change in the geopolitical situation in West Asia. Indeed, a sort of tactic alliance between Tehran and Washington seems to be in place in defending the current Iraqi government against the IS. But besides this fresh concern in West Asia, the US is also now countering the rise of China, as also, dealing with Russia. In this context, holding out the possibility of a negotiated end to the nuclear stand-off with Iran seemed to be a prudent way out.
Let us then get to the “parameters” for the JCPOA. First, what is striking over here is the fact that Iran has accepted what may very well be one of the most intrusive inspection regimes of the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) ever. IAEA inspectors will have access to the entire supply chain through which the crucial materials (for the nuclear programme) are obtained, and thus to Iran’s uranium mines and processing facilities over a period of 25 years. And, the inspections can be unannounced. Moreover, advanced intimation has to be given to the IAEA when Tehran decides to construct any new nuclear facilities. Second, no new enrichment facilities will be built over the next 15 years. Further, any enrichment of uranium will not be above 3.7%, a level just enough for nuclear power plants, even as the stockpile of such lowly-enriched uranium will have to be reduced to a fraction of its current level. Iran has to very drastically reduce its uranium enrichment capacity, and what is more, it can use only the first generation of its centrifuges, and thus, it has to remove the more advanced ones. Third, Iran has to redesign its Arak heavy water reactor so that it will not be able to produce weapon-grade plutonium. Indeed, in the final agreement, Iran will have to commit to refrain from developing a reprocessing facility to extract plutonium to produce nuclear weapons.
What, one might then ask, will Iran get in return? First, the punitive sanctions imposed by the US and the European Union will be “suspended” (not lifted) after the IAEA verifies that all the above steps have been taken. We say “not lifted” because such sanctions can “snap back into place” if the “judges” of the IAEA declare that Iran has not complied with any of what it has committed to fulfil. Of course, and this is most important, Iran has to address all of the IAEA’s concerns regarding the “Possible Military Dimensions” of its nuclear programme. If any complaint about Iran’s implementation of the deal is not resolved to the satisfaction of the judges, then the sanctions, including those of the United Nations, can be reimposed. And, as a sop, the agreement “encourages” international cooperation to aid Iran’s civil nuclear R&D, this after not allowing any uranium enrichment at its Fordow nuclear facility, stipulating its conversion to a research centre but barring it from doing any research on enrichment!
Clearly, the framework agreement has been imposed on Iran, for the latter has been subjected to various punitive sanctions, adversely affecting its economy and the well-being of the Iranian people, as also, the threat of force, including military strikes. One is left wondering if, in such circumstances, Iran could ever have negotiated to make West Asia a nuclear-weapon-free zone by demanding the dispossession of Israel of its stockpile of nuclear weapons. The so-called “international community,” which is beholden to the world’s foremost imperialist power, has never called for any of the kinds of punitive sanctions that Iran is being subjected to apply to Israel. Of course, the world’s foremost imperialist power has the largest stockpile of nuclear weapons, and is the only national power to have used nuclear bombs. Yet, this “international community” concedes to it the right to keep all other nations under its control on nuclear matters. The duplicity and the self-serving logic of imperialism are starkly evident, except that the conservative and liberal strategic-affairs experts refuse to even acknowledge its existence.
