Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good ReasonsTehran Times, January 13 2021:… Iran cannot possibly be expected to trust the United States again after the unilateral withdrawal of the Trump administration from the JCPOA P5+1 nuclear deal, the subsequent American imposition of wartime economic sanctions on Iran, and obvious American involvement in and support for the [Gen.] Soleimani and Fakhrizadeh assassinations. I believe the more recent Fakhrizadeh murder, was undertaken by the Israeli Mossad and the MEK-MKO with full American connivance.” Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons .

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good ReasonsPompeo Support for MEK and UANI

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons

1- U.S. should lift sanctions before rejoining JCPOA

The final say

Tehran Times, January 13 2021:

TEHRAN – Iran has not benefited from the 2015 nuclear deal and that it is not in a rush to get the United States to return to the nuclear deal because if the U.S. is to return to the deal without lifting its sanctions, it is Washington, not Tehran, that will benefit from the deal, officially called the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

In a dossier on the JCPOA, the Website of the Leader’s office made interviews with several high-ranking Iranian officials to discuss the latest developments regarding the nuclear deal and a possible U.S. return to it. Ali Akbar Velayati, an advisor to the Leader of the Islamic Revolution on international affairs, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, Parliament Speaker Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, Saeed Jalili, the former nuclear negotiator, Ali Akar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, and Kamal Kharrazi, the head of Iran’s Council on Foreign Relations are among the officials that were interviewed by the website, which has published only a few of the interviews.

MEK Trashing American Foreign Policy

The common theme between the interviews is that the U.S. must lift its sanctions on Iran before rejoining the JCPOA because if the U.S. returns to the deal without the lifting of sanctions, Iran will gain nothing. On the contrary, the U.S. will once again achieve the status of being a “JCPOA participant,” which enables the U.S. to trigger the so-called snapback mechanism.

“After [UN Security Council] Resolution 2231, a U.S. participation in the JCPOA is useful only if it includes economic advantages for Iran. Through [Resolution] 2231, the Islamic Republic has achieved its goal with the U.S. participation in the JCPOA. In other words, the (sanctions) resolutions have been terminated. [But] now the U.S. can gain this concession by rejoining the JCPOA. This is not a concession that the U.S. will give us. Rather, it is a concession that the U.S. can get for itself, which means that the U.S. can monitor the implementation of the JCPOA. Therefore, the U.S. return to the JCPOA without the lifting of sanctions will not only not be in our interests, but it will be a sheer interest for the U.S.,” Zarif told  Khamenei.ir.

Velayati echoed a similar view, saying that the U.S. must lift the sanctions if it wants to rejoin the JCPOA.

“We do not insist on the U.S. return and we’re not in a rush for such a thing but if it wants to return, there are certain conditions, the most important of which is for the U.S. to lift the sanctions and make it clear that the new administration is living up to its obligations…. Therefore, if the U.S. wants to return to the JCPOA, it must end the sanctions, and of course, we do not insist on this return; if it wants to return then it can return, and if it doesn’t want to return then it can stay out of the deal. If they want to return, they must fulfill our conditions that are quite reasonable and make up for the shortcomings of the past,” Velayati stated.

Iran has made it clear that it is not eagerly waiting for the U.S. to return to the JCPOA. During his recent televised speech, the Leader of Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyed Ali Khamenei said that Iran is focusing on the lifting of the sanctions, not the U.S. return to the nuclear deal.

“The first point is the discussion about whether the U.S. should return to the Barjam or not. We do not at all insist on this and we are in no rush for the U.S. to return to it. Our issue is not at all if the U.S. will return to that deal or not. Our reasonable and logical demand is the lifting of sanctions. Sanctions should be lifted. This is a right that has been taken from the Iranian nation, whether by the U.S. or by the Europeans – who are tied to the U.S.’s apron strings and who follow that country,” the Leader said. “They are obliged to grant this right to the Iranian nation. Only if sanctions are lifted, will the U.S.’s return to Barjam have a meaning.”

Barjam is the Persian acronym for the JCPOA.

The Leader also pointed out that Iran does not see a U.S. return to the JCPOA without the lifting of the sanctions as a concession. In reality, such a return would be to Iran’s disadvantage, Ayatollah Khamenei remarked.

“If sanctions are not supposed to be lifted, then its return to the JCPOA might even be to our disadvantage. Not only will it not be to our advantage, but it will also be to our disadvantage. Of course, I have told officials, both in the executive and legislative branches, that they should move forward in a careful manner and by observing all the necessary steps,” the Leader stated.

Pompeo attends meeting linked to MEK cult that murdered 6 Americans

It remains to be seen whether the incoming Biden administration would lift the U.S. sanctions on Iran before rejoining the JCPOA. President-elect Joe Biden has said many times, before and after the November election, that he will return the U.S. to the Iran nuclear deal. But he did not say how he will rejoin the deal, whether he would lift sanctions before rejoining the deal.

Last year in September, Biden said in an op-ed for CNN that he will offer Tehran a credible path back to diplomacy. If Iran returns to strict compliance with the nuclear deal, Biden wrote, the United States would rejoin the agreement as a starting point for follow-on negotiations. Biden reaffirmed this position after he won the November election. But he also implied that he will raise other non-nuclear issues such as Iran’s missile program, which the Europeans have already raised. Americans and Europeans have called for a new round of talks with Iran to expand the existing deal and fix its alleged flaws.

Iran responded to this new demand by saying that there would be no negotiations on the missile issue. And now Iran has also implied that it wants to fix the deal’s flaws that the West never raised.

” Heshmat Alavi Gate ” , Trump and MEK

Velayati pointed to some flaws of the deal, saying that the JCPOA was not signed by the U.S. president at the time. He said the Leader had demanded a written commitment from then-President Barack Obama that the U.S. would implement its JCPOA commitments. But the U.S. refused to make such a commitment and rather it provided an oral one, which was later reneged on.

Velayati also said that Iran is not satisfied with the so-called snapback mechanism within the JCPOA. According to Velayati, the Leader was not content with this mechanism right from the start, but the mechanism was built into the JCPOA despite his discontent.

“If there is to be new negotiations, this mechanism must be certainly removed as an illogical provision,” Velayati said.

The snapback mechanism is a legal mechanism built into the JCPOA which allows a “JCPOA participant state” to restore all UN sanctions on Iran in case it didn’t uphold its obligations under the nuclear deal.

Link to the source

2- Iran exporting heavy water to eight countries, learning lessons from the U.S.’s past behaviors

Tehran Times, January 12 2021:

TEHRAN – The spokesman for Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) says not only Iran is producing enough heavy water to use for its own facilities, but even exporting the excess quantity to eight other countries.

In a televised interview on Monday evening, Behrouz Kamalvandi said Iran must have its own nuclear power plants and produce the fuel required for those plants as well as the nuclear medicine it needs. He also said Iran has never stopped producing heavy water and made a good progress in this regard.

Kamalvandi said, “Though there are ten or eight-year restrictions on our program imposed by the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Actions (commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal), they will be ultimately removed as time goes by, and we will have no limit by the tenth year.”

VOA, Voice of America? Voice of Trump? Or Voice of Mojahedin-e Khalq MEK ?

“After the conclusion of the nuclear deal between Tehran and the other parties to the agreement, some countries were eve willing to invest in production of fuel required for Iranian nuclear power plants inside the country, but the Americans prevented them from doing so,” he stated.

U.S. President Donald Trump withdrew Washington from the 2015 agreement in May 2018, raising criticism from all around the world (except some of his allies in West Asia) for this unilateral action. This, along with Washington’s exit from some other international treaties and leaving the World Health Organization, has brought several top politicians and officials around the world to the conclusion that the U.S. cannot be trusted as a partner or a party of any important deal, even by its most loyal allies.

For example, in an interview with the Tehran Times in December, Giorgio Cafiero, the chief executive officer of Gulf State Analytics (GSA), said, “Some Arab states in the Persian Gulf such as Saudi Arabia and the UAE supported Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ campaign against Iran. Yet others such as Qatar and Oman did not welcome the U.S.’s growing aggression against Iran in the Trump period. All Arab countries in the Persian Gulf have had to contend with the unpredictability and incoherence of Trump’s foreign policy, which created greater doubt about the wisdom of remaining so dependent on the U.S. for security relations and prompted them to explore deeper partnerships with other powers such as China, France, Turkey, and Russia”.

Ali Safavi NCRIRemember: MEK was an American excuse to invade Iraq

Some American and non-American analysts count this reckless behavior as one of the most important reasons for Trump’s epic failure in the 2020 presidential elections. They argue when the new administration takes office on January 20, major policy changes will emerge in regard to the JCPOA and the U.S. commitment to its content. Daryl G. Kimball, the executive director of the Arms Control Association, told the Tehran Times in December that the European Union, Germany, and the Biden administration are united in their positions that full implementation of the Iran nuclear deal by each side is a “win-win”.

“With one of the key supporters of the JCPOA entering the White House on January 20, the United States and Iran and the other parties to the agreement have an important opportunity restore compliance with the agreement, which will help restore confidence that Iran is not pursuing the development of nuclear weapons and will help provide the economic and financial relief that the Iranian people were hoping for when the JCPOA was concluded in 2015. Mr. Biden’s public remarks clearly indicate that he supports a simultaneous restoration of compliance with the terms and obligations of the JCPOA. Biden, once sworn into office, can waive the application of the nuclear-related sanctions that the United States waived when Iran implemented its obligations under the JCPOA in January 2016, as well as other duplicative sanctions imposed by the Trump administration,” Kimball explained.

Despite their disagreement with some actions taken by the U.S. government, the European troika (Germany, England, and France) accompanied Trump on most of his unlawful sanctions against Iran and failed to take any serious step towards fulfilling their obligations under the JCPOA. This, regardless of whether the incoming Biden administration return to the JCPOA or not, the issue of “guarantee to commit” has been raised in academic and political circles. Many analysts believe that even if Biden decides to return to the deal there is no guarantee that a Republican administration won’t quit the nuclear deal again.

” Heshmat Alavi Gate ” , Trump and MEK

For example, Shashank Joshi, a defense editor at the Economist, told the Tehran Times in December that a possible Republican administration in the U.S. is likely to breach the nuclear deal again.

“There is no guarantee the next administrations won’t behave like Donald Trump’s and pull out of international deals unilaterally. Iran must contend with the risk that a Republican administration in 2024 will once more walk away from a deal. The JCPOA was divisive and controversial in the United States, and there will remain strong opposition to it in the Republican Party for years to come. The lesson of the Trump era is that America is highly polarized and that diplomatic agreements may be less enduring and stable than they were in the past,” Joshi said.

In another interview, Mark Dankof, a former U.S. Senate candidate, told the Tehran Times that even under Joe Biden, there will be no substantive change whatsoever in American foreign policy and Iran cannot possibly be expected to trust the United States again after the unilateral withdrawal of the Trump administration from the nuclear deal.

“The proof of this is found in his historic Zionist connections, those same connections with his running mate Kamala Harris, and the foreign policy choices Biden has made or will make, beginning with Zionist Jew Anthony Blinken. Blinken is linked to Bill Clinton’s NATO war crimes in bombing Serbia in 1999, and the Obama-Hillary Clinton war crimes involved in bombing 7 Islamic countries, including Libya and Syria, where NATO was illegally used in Libya and Gaddafi was assassinated with Hillary Clinton’s mocking approval, and where the United States began using Sunni Wahabi extremists and terrorists from al-Qaeda and ISIS chapters to attempt overthrowing a sovereign government in Syria at the behest of Israel, Saudi Arabia, and Turkey,” Dankof said.

Pointing to the assassination of Iranian top nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh and high ranking Iranian military official Lt. Gen. Qassem Soleimani as other reasons for distrust, Dankof added, “Iran cannot possibly be expected to trust the United States again after the unilateral withdrawal of the Trump administration from the JCPOA P5+1 nuclear deal, the subsequent American imposition of wartime economic sanctions on Iran, and obvious American involvement in and support for the [Gen.] Soleimani and Fakhrizadeh assassinations. I believe the more recent Fakhrizadeh murder, was undertaken by the Israeli Mossad and the MEK-MKO with full American connivance.”

Iran has undertaken necessary measures to save the nuclear deal and IAEA inspectors have repeatedly confirmed that Iran’s nuclear program is peaceful. Over the last couple of months, Iran has been taking five steps in scaling back its obligations, among them abandoning operational limitations on its nuclear industry, such as the level of uranium enrichment.

The most recent step was taken by Iranian Parliament in terms of a legislation which gives all parties to the JCPOA (especially the incoming U.S. administration) only two months (which ends on February 21) to fulfill their obligations under the JCPOA. Rafael Grossi, the IAEA chief, said on Monday, “We must take this seriously. Only a few weeks left to revive Iran nuclear deal.”

Despite these practical steps to revive its peaceful nuclear program, several Iranian officials have repeatedly stated that Iran will come back to full compliance to its obligations under the JCPOA if all other parties deal do so.

Link to the source

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons 

***

Heshmat Alavi and MEK MEK Impunity Undermining Democracy

Also read:
https://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/mossad-used-mujahedin-e-khalq-mek-for-assassination/

Mossad Used Mujahedin-e-Khalq MEK for Assassination of Fakhrizadeh

Mossad Used Mujahedin-e-Khalq MEK for Assassination OF FakhrizadehReese Erlich, The progressive, December 07 2020:… According to professor Marandi, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) is suspected of having actually killed Fakhrizadeh. “The MEK works with the United States and Israel,” he says. “Teams from MEK have been involved in the past.” From 2007-12, Israel used the MEK to carry out sophisticated assassinations of five nuclear scientists inside Iran, as reported in the Christian Science Monitor. The Israeli Mossad trained members of the MEK to carry out the hits. Mossad Used Mujahedin-e-Khalq MEK for Assassination OF Fakhrizadeh . 

Mossad Used Mujahedin-e-Khalq MEK for Assassination OF FakhrizadehIran Reveals: Albanian MEK and Mossad Definitely Together On Assassination

Mossad Used Mujahedin-e-Khalq MEK for Assassination of Fakhrizadeh

Foreign Correspondent: Iran Assassination Aims to Hurt Biden

Israel and Trump are deliberately trying to provoke a crisis for the next President to inherit, Iran sources say.

Imagine for a moment what would happen if unknown assassins murdered a high-ranking U.S. scientist involved with chemical weapons. Let’s say officials in Iran quietly took responsibility, arguing that the United States had violated international law because it continues to hold stockpiles of mustard gas and nerve agents VX and sarin, despite numerous commitments to destroy them starting in the late 1990s.

Compare that fictional assassination with Israel’s actual assassination of Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a prominent Iranian scientist described as the “father of the Iranian bomb.” The fictional and real murders are analogous with an important exception: The United States has had a chemical weapons program since 1917. Iran has no nuclear weapons program.

If the Iranian government assassinated a U.S. military or scientific leader, professor Joshua Landis, director of the Farzaneh Family Center for Iran and Persian Gulf Studies at the University of Oklahoma, tells me, “It would cause absolute outrage and very swift retribution.”

On November 27, Fakhrizadeh, a military leader and professor, was killed while on his way to visit relatives outside Tehran. The New York Times cites intelligence sources who identify Israel as responsible for the attack.

“People are angry,” professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi tells me from Tehran. He’s chair of the American Studies Department at the University of Tehran. “People expect retaliation, a lethal strike on Israeli targets,” he says.

While the nature of the military response is unclear, Marandi says, “There will be decreased cooperation with International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and increased enrichment of uranium.”

On December 2, the Iranian parliament voted to increase its uranium stockpiles to a higher level than needed for nuclear power generation, but still below the level to build a bomb. It also gave Washington until early February to lift economic sanctions or Iran would bar IAEA inspectors from entering Iran.

It seems obvious to me that in its waning days, the Trump Administration gave Israel the go ahead to provoke a crisis. Trump and Netanyahu hope to handcuff President-elect Joe Biden in future dealings with Iran.

I well remember the days leading up to the 2003 U.S. occupation of Iraq, when I explained that Saddam Hussein didn’t have weapons of mass destruction and wasn’t a threat to the American people.

Now I’m doing it all over again with Iran, except Washington is waging covert, not overt, war against Iran. Based on reporting in Israel and Iran, I wrote in my book, The Iran Agenda Today, that U.S. and Israeli officials know perfectly well that Iran doesn’t have a nuclear weapons program.

Don’t take my word for it. In two separate reports, the CIA and major U.S. intelligence agencies found that Iran has had no nuclear weapons program since 2003. Iranian leaders say they never had a nuclear weapons program at all.

The Netanyahu regime in Tel Aviv never accepted the CIA position, arguing Tehran continued a secret program even after signing the nuclear accord. Netanyahu says that in 2018 Israel took documents from a Tehran warehouse proving Iran continued its weapons program and even mentioned Mohsen Fakhrizadeh by name.

Critics say the warehouse story doesn’t hold up, noting that the documents revealed so far don’t even have Iranian government markings. And no independent, Farsi-speaking experts have been allowed to conduct a forensic analysis of the original documents.

Israel, which secretly developed nuclear weapons in the 1960s, is hardly in a position to criticize Iran. Israel has an estimated 200 nuclear bombs capable of destroying Iran and any Arab country seen as the enemy du jour. Now Netanyahu seems determined to blow up the potential of relations between the United States and Iran, and prevent resumption of the nuclear accord.

According to professor Marandi, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) is suspected of having actually killed Fakhrizadeh. “The MEK works with the United States and Israel,” he says. “Teams from MEK have been involved in the past.”

From 2007-12, Israel used the MEK to carry out sophisticated assassinations of five nuclear scientists inside Iran, as reported in the Christian Science Monitor. The Israeli Mossad trained members of the MEK to carry out the hits.

The MEK began in the 1970s as a revolutionary group opposed to the Shah’s dictatorship. But it fought alongside Saddam Hussein’s troops during the 1980-88 Iran-Iraq War, earning the permanent enmity of most Iranians.

When the United States invaded Iraq in 2003, the MEK switched sides again and allied with Washington and Tel Aviv. It doesn’t allow its members to marry and keeps them isolated from the outside world.

“MEK is a cult and terrorist organization,” Marandi says.

The Trump Administration has squandered resources and wrecked alliances with the Europeans in its failed “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran, says professor Landis.

According to professor Marandi, the Mujahedin-e-Khalq (MEK) is suspected of having actually killed Fakhrizadeh. “The MEK works with the United States and Israel,” he says. “Teams from MEK have been involved in the past.” From 2007-12, Israel used the MEK to carry out sophisticated assassinations of five nuclear scientists inside Iran, as reported in the Christian Science Monitor. The Israeli Mossad trained members of the MEK to carry out the hits.

“America needs a deal,” he continues. “U.S. supremacy in the world has taken a nosedive. Other powers are successfully competing with the U.S. The U.S. is bogged down in the Middle East and needs to avoid nuclear proliferation in the region without going to war with Iran.”

But both Republican and Democratic hawks want to squeeze more concessions from a weakened Iran by demanding a ban on certain conventional missiles and other issues previously rejected by Iran. Possible Iranian retaliation for the Fakhrizadeh assassination would complicate matters even further.

Marandi thinks the Biden Administration should rejoin the accord, regardless of what actions Iran may take in response to the assassination. “Responding to the terrorist attack and waiting for Biden to abide by the nuclear deal, these are two separate issues,” he says. “If Biden chooses to implement the deal, that’s fine with Iran.”

But hardliners in Iran argue that Washington can’t be trusted, and they oppose reopening talks. They advocate a “resistance economy,” combating the effect of U.S. sanctions by producing more products at home, and forging closer alliances with Russia and China. Hardliners are known as principalists because they claim to uphold the Islamic principles of the Iranian Revolution.

“The principlists were defying the nuclear accord from day number one,” a highly placed Iranian journalist tells me from Tehran. Trump and Netanyahu were “a divine gift to them. The assassination of Fakhrizadeh gives them leverage against the moderates in Iran and makes problems for Biden.”

Marandi explains, “It’s widely believed in Iran that Biden won’t fully implement the deal and abide by U.S. commitments. We’ll have to see.”

I think Washington can show good faith by lifting sanctions prior to opening negotiations. Then both sides could work out such details as destroying the excess enriched uranium and arranging for frequent international inspections.

Iranians are waiting for Biden to make the first move after his Inauguration on January 20, 2021. Lifting unilateral U.S. sanctions is the key to foiling Trump’s attempt to handcuff the new administration. We’ll see if Biden finds a good locksmith.

— 

Reese Erlich’s “Foreign Correspondent” column appears regularly in The Progressive. Erlich is an adjunct professor in International Studies at the University of San Francisco.

Link to the source

Mossad Used Mujahedin-e-Khalq MEK for Assassination of Fakhrizadeh 

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons 

***

Also read:
https://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/mossad-mek-assassinated-fakhrizadeh/

Mossad MEK Assassinated Fakhrizadeh

Mossad MEK Assassinated FakhrizadehTrita Parsi, Responsible Statecraft, November 28 2020:… Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a key Iranian nuclear official, has been assassinated in Tehran. Some Iranian reports claim it was a suicide attack, which would reduce the likelihood of Israeli operatives carrying out the attack, but the bullet holes in Fakhrizadeh’s car cast doubt on that. Israel has in the past, however, used operatives from the the MEK — a cult-like Iranian exile group recently removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations — to conduct attacks in Iran. The MEK was the first group to introduce suicide assassinations to Iran. Mossad MEK Assassinated Fakhrizadeh 

Mossad MEK Assassinated FakhrizadehMossad And MEK Role in Fabrication of Nuclear Documents against Iran

Mossad MEK Assassinated Fakhrizadeh

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons 

How the assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientist can sabotage diplomacy & start a war

Mossad MEK Assassinated Fakhrizadeh

Mossad MEK Assassinated Fakhrizadeh

Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, a key Iranian nuclear official, has been assassinated in Tehran. While it’s unclear as of this writing who is responsible, Israel has assassinated numerous Iranian nuclear scientists in the past, but had, until now,  been unable to get to the highly protected Fakhrizadeh.

Some Iranian reports claim it was a suicide attack, which would reduce the likelihood of Israeli operatives carrying out the attack, but the bullet holes in Fakhrizadeh’s car cast doubt on that.

Israel has in the past, however, used operatives from the the MEK — a cult-like Iranian exile group recently removed from the State Department’s list of terrorist organizations — to conduct attacks in Iran. The MEK was the first group to introduce suicide assassinations to Iran.

But Israel is a prime suspect for several reasons: It has the expertise and capacity, has done it before, and has a motive.

While it’s highly unlikely that Israel would have carried out the assassination without a green light from the Trump   administration, a more direct U.S. role cannot be entirely discounted. The Trump administration has reportedly run several joint sabotage operations with Israel against Iran’s nuclear facilities in the past year and relied in part on Israeli intelligence in carrying out the assassination of Gen. Qasem Soleimani outside the Baghdad airport last January. Earlier this month, Trump himself reportedly raised the possibility of attacking Iran with his top national-security advisers, while it was just last week that the administration’s most prominent Iran hawk, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, met with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, well as leaders of Iran’s adversaries in the Persian Gulf, notably Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. 

In any event, conducting attacks in Iran has few downsides for Israel right now. Iran could lash out and spark a broader conflict that sucks in the United States, bringing about a U.S.-Iran confrontation that Netanyahu has long sought.

Or, if Iran sits tight to wait to deal with President-elect Joe Biden, the Trump administration is highly unlikely to impose any costs on other Israeli provocations.

Either way, the assassination (and other likely future attacks) will likely harden Iran’s position and complicate — if not ultimately cripple — the Biden team’s attempts to revive diplomacy. That serves Netanyahu’s interest as well.

Indeed, Tehran’s openness to post-JCPOA negotiations on missiles and other matters will likely diminish if Israel engages in renewed assassinations in Iran. In fact, the Obama administration condemned Israel’s earlier assassinations precisely because it knew the murders wouldn’t so much set back Iran’s nuclear program, as it would any efforts to negotiate a deal to curb it.

Assuming Israel’s responsibility and the Trump administration’s acquiescence, if not complicity, in additional Israeli provocations, we now find ourselves in a similar, but perhaps more perilous situation for the next two months — especially if Biden and his foreign policy team fail to strongly communicate that Israel will incur costs if it continues to carry out attacks inside Iran during the current interregnum.

As such, we should be prepared for a very bumpy ride pending Biden’s inauguration. And if it turns out that Israel was behind the assassination, there should be no illusions about Netanyahu’s desire to drag the United States into another endless war in the Middle East.

It’s also important that the American public take note of the broader pattern. From around 2002 to 2012, Israel pressed the United States to address Iran’s nuclear program. During that period, Washington obligingly imposed ever-tougher sanctions against Tehran and repeatedly threatened military action. But those efforts failed as Iran systematically built up its nuclear capabilities.

Then, from 2012 to 2015, the United States tried real diplomacy — along with the United Kingdom, France, Germany, Russia, and China — culminating in the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), widely hailed as the most far- reaching non-proliferation agreement ever negotiated, and by which Iran agreed to sharply curb its nuclear program. Despite those constraints, Israel declared its opposition and successfully pressed the Trump administration to end U.S. participation in 2018 and impose new sanctions as part of its “maximum pressure” campaign against Iran.

Predictably, a series of escalations since then has brought the United States and Iran minutes away from war, twice

But still, the war that many in Israel and in the United States have sought has yet to fully materialize. And now that Biden has defeated Trump, those who want war, particularly in Israel, likely see their window of opportunity closing. Meanwhile, Israel is coordinating with Trump, Saudi Arabia, and the United Arab Emirates for a flood of new sanctions designed to, again, at a minimum to sabotage Biden’s chances of restarting diplomacy with Iran. 

If Israel was behind the assassination of Fakhrizadeh — which seems highly likely though not yet proven — it demonstrates the degree to which Netanyahu feels emboldened to undermine Democratic U.S. presidents with impunity and drag the United States into war.

U.S. strategic partnerships should serve to make the United States more, not less, secure. But that is where we are today with many American partnerships around the world. This will not change unless and until Washington decides to end its drive for military hegemony in the Middle East.

Link to the source

Mossad MEK Assassinated Fakhrizadeh

Iran Not Trusting USA For Good Reasons 

***

Also read:
https://iran-interlink.org/wordpress/mek-part-of-mossad-assassination-teams/

MEK Part of Mossad Assassination Teams

MEK Part of Mossad Assassination TeamsTed Snider , Counter Punch, July 29 2019:… Two senior officials in the Obama administration revealed to NBC news that the assassinations were carried out by the MEK. They also confirm that the MEK was being financed, armed and trained by the Israeli Mossad and that the assassinations were carried out with the awareness of the United States. The State, too, has secretly trained and supported the MEK. MEK Part of Mossad Assassination Teams 

MEK Part of Mossad Assassination TeamsMossad MEK and Fujairah False Flag 

MEK Part of Mossad Assassination Teams

Shaping the News: The World’s Not the Way it Seems

In Othello, the villainous Iago manipulatively shapes the way people perceive events, ensuring that everyone sees the world, not as it is, but as it suits Iago’s purposes. America is Iago. Shakespeare would shudder.

White House perception shapers and the U.S. media shape the way the public perceives the world by severing events from the causal context that explains and makes sense of them. The event can then be manipulatively woven into the public perception in whatever way suits U.S. purposes, amputated from any context that makes sense of it and allows the public to see the world as it is.

In recent weeks, perception shapers have manipulated the public to see events in Brazil and Iran, not as they are, but as they suit U.S. foreign policy.

Brazil
Regime change in Brazil demanded two steps: the removal of President Dilma Rouseff and the arrest of former President Lula da Silva.

The first was made to look like proper parliamentary procedure. Dilma was charged with “violating fiscal laws by using loans from public banks to cover budget shortfalls, which artificially enhanced the budget surplus” and removed from office. But that accounting manipulation is not uncommon; according to the Brazil’s federal prosecutor, it is also not a crime. The perception shapers not only knew it wasn’t a crime, they knew it was a coup.

How did they know? Because the coup plotters told them so. In a post-coup speech in front of members of multinational corporations and the U.S. policy establishment in New York on September 22, 2016, newly installed president Michel Temer brazenly boasted of his successful coup. Temer clearly told his American audience that elected President Dilma Rousseff was not removed from power for accounting manipulations as the official charge stated. She was – the new, unelected president admitted – removed because of her refusal to implement a right wing economic plan that was inconsistent with the economic platform on which Brazilians elected her.

Rousseff was not on board. So, she was thrown overboard. In the words of Temer’s confession:

“And many months ago, while I was still vice president, we released a document named ‘A Bridge to the Future’ because we knew it would be impossible for the government to continue on that course. We suggested that the government should adopt the theses presented in that document called ‘A Bridge to the Future.’ But, as that did not work out, the plan wasn’t adopted and a process was established which culminated with me being installed as president of the republic.”

And that wasn’t even news because a transcript of a phone call revealed “a national pact” to remove Dilma and install Temer as president. The transcript identifies the opposition, the military and the Supreme Court as coup conspirators.

America’s back yard was escaping: it had to be once again annexed. So, the public wasn’t given the context, and the coup was perceived as proper parliamentary procedure.

But the removal of Dilma Rouseff wasn’t enough because waiting in the wings was her even more popular mentor, former President Lula da Silva. And Lula was poised to win the next election. So, Lula had to go.

America could not allow the return of Lula. He had cooperated with Venezuela’s Hugo Chavez in his life and eulogized him in his death. Lula had been a powerful force in the gravitational shift that had temporarily pulled Latin America out of the American orbit. His return was impossible, so the script had to be changed. So, Lula was arrested, convicted and barred from running for president in the 2018 election. Lulu was banished to prison over a bribe in which the construction company OAS offered him an apartment in exchange for inflated contracts. But no evidence was ever provided that Lulu accepted the bribe or ever stayed in or rented out the apartment.

In the past few weeks, more details have emerged on what context the perception shapers amputated. It is now clear why it never bothered anyone that there was no evidence against Lula: because the prosecutors did not need evidence. The perception shapers forgot to tell the public that Lula’s prosecutors were conspiring with his judge to frame him with the bribery charges. The Intercept reports that judge and prosecutors illegally collaborated to build the case against Lula, despite serious doubts about the evidence, and to prevent his party from winning the 2018 presidential election.

Absent this historical context, the removal of Dilma and the arrest of Lula look like legal and parliamentary maneuvers. But suturing them back together reveals a coup.

Iran
Iran recently stunned the States by shooting down a $130 million U.S. Global Hawk surveillance drone. U.S. officials called the incident “an unprovoked attack.” But that label requires two acts of historical amputation: one to call it unprovoked and the other to call it an attack.

To paint America as innocent and feign shock at Iran’s unprovoked attack, the recent past—not to mention a longer past going back to the 1953 coup—needs to be erased: the shooting down of the drone needs to be amputated from its historical context.

America has press Iranians down under the weight of unprecedented unilateral sanctions. Adding the word “economic” to the word “attack” doesn’t make it any less of an attack, and it may well constitute an internationally prohibited act of aggression. Iran’s economy is suffering, and its people are being killed.

Just as adding the word “economic” to the word “attack” doesn’t make it any less of an attack, neither does adding the word “cyber.” But the U.S. has admitted to cyber attacks on Iran. The Stuxnet virus infected Iran’s centrifuges and sent them spinning wildly out of control before playing back previously recorded tapes of normal operations which plant operators watched unsuspectingly while the centrifuges literally tore themselves apart. Stuxnet seems to have wiped out about 20% of Iran’s nuclear centrifuges. Such an attack on Iranian territory is surely no less an act of war because the weapon used is a cyber weapon.

And Stuxnet, it turns out, was only the beginning. The U.S. also ordered sophisticated attacks on the computers that run Iran’s nuclear enrichment facilities. A virus much larger than Stuxnet, known as Flame, attacked Iranian computers. This virus maps and monitors the system of Iranian computers and sends back intelligence that is used to prepare for cyber war campaigns like the one undertaken by Stuxnet. Officials have now confirmed that Flame is one part of a joint project of America’s CIA and NSA and Israel’s secret military unit 8200. A NATO study said that Stuxnet qualified as an “illegal act of force.” So much for unprovoked.

Economic warfare, cyber warfare and assassinations too. Since 2010, there have been at least three assassinations and one attempted assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists. Two senior officials in the Obama administration revealed to NBC news that the assassinations were carried out by the MEK. They also confirm that the MEK was being financed, armed and trained by the Israeli Mossad and that the assassinations were carried out with the awareness of the United States. The State, too, has secretly trained and supported the MEK.

And there is yet one more kind of provocation. In The Iran Agenda Today, Reese Erlich discusses America’s long history of supporting dissident groups and even of sponsoring terrorist attacks inside Iran. He and Seymour Hersh both say that the U.S. funded and supported Kurdish guerillas.

Of course the public will perceive an event as unprovoked if the perception shapers’ narrative begins after the provocations.

The Iranian attack isn’t unprovoked. It also isn’t an attack. Iran says it was a defence. They say they were not attacking but defending because they shot down the drone only after it violated Iranian airspace. The U.S. says the drone was in international airspace. But Iran has displayed drone wreckage at a press conference that they claim proves their case. And the Secretary of Russia’s Security Council says that the Russian military has intelligence showing that the U.S. drone was inside Iranian air space when it was shot down.

In the most detailed account of the events leading up to the shooting down of the drone—events that were virtually entirely severed from the perception shapers’ account—Vijay Prashad reattaches the amputated prior context. In fact, the U.S. had been flying surveillance aircraft along the Iranian coastline, testing Iranian radars. Not one, but two aircraft violated Iranian airspace: the often-reported unmanned drone and a manned P-8 spy plane. After Iran air command radioed U.S. forces to report the airspace violation, the P-8 withdrew, but the drone did not. It was only after Iran’s airspace had been violated, they had warned the U.S. and the drone had refused to leave that Iran shot down the drone. In a personal correspondence, Prashad told me that his source for this account of the context was two Gulf state diplomats. Other sources have also reported that there was a second manned aircraft and that, far from attacking, Iran showed restraint by not shooting down the P-8 airplane and the thirty-five people on board.

With the context reattached, the attack was a defence. But the subsequent American cyber attack on computers that control Iran’s rocket and missile launchers, like the previous Stuxnet and Flame cyber attacks, was not a defence, but an attack.

It is only with the amputation of the relevant historical context that Iran’s shooting down of an American drone can be shaped to appear as “an unprovoked attack.” Suturing the event and the context back together reveals, not only provocation, but defensive action.

Ted Snider has a graduate degree in philosophy and writes on analyzing patterns in U.S. foreign policy and history. His work has appeared in AntiWar.com, Mondoweiss and others.

MEK Part of Mossad Assassination Teams

Link to the source

***

The Many Faces of the MEK, Explained By Its Former Top Spy Massoud KhodabandehThe Many Faces of the MEK, Explained By Its Former Top Spy Massoud Khodabandeh

Mossad MEK and Fujairah False FlagMossad MEK Iran tip-off not trustworthy

Also read: