US Senate passes 10-year extension of Iran Sanctions Act

[Mithridates II the Great]

In the name of God

I found it surprising nobody had posted this here before ! , Probably people are not interested to see the Western hypocrisy and unreliability .

US Senate passes 10-year extension of Iran Sanctions Act

The US Senate has passed a 10-year extension of existing sanctions against Iran, sending the measure to the White House for President Barack Obama to sign into law.

Senators on Thursday unanimously backed the renewal of the Iran Sanctions Act (ISA) by a vote of 99 to 0.

The House of Representatives voted 419 to 1 last month to reauthorize ISA, which was first introduced in 1996 to punish investments in Iran's energy industry based on accusations that Tehran was pursuing non-civilian objectives in its nuclear energy program.

The Obama administration has expressed reservations about the utility of the legislation, but congressional aides said they expected Obama would sign it when it reached his desk. The act is set to expire at the end of 2016.

“If the sanctions architecture has expired, then we have no sanctions which we can snap back,” said hawkish Democratic Senator Bob Menendez, who opposed the nuclear accord between Iran and six major powers.

Iran and the five permanent members of the UN Security Council -- the United States, Britain, Russia, China, France as well as Germany – reached a landmark nuclear agreement last year, under which Tehran agreed to limit some aspects of its nuclear program in exchange for removal of all sanctions.

The two sides began implementing the deal, dubbed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), on January 16. However, members of Congress said they wanted ISA to be extended for another decade to send a strong signal that any US president would have the ability to “snap back” sanctions on Iran.

"Unless Congress acts, the congressional sanctions don't exist after December 31," Maryland Senator Ben Cardin, ranking member on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, said on Tuesday. "The ability to snap back wouldn't be there on the congressional side."

"While we do not think that an extension of ISA is necessary, we do not believe that a clean extension would be a violation of the JCPOA," a senior Obama administration official said on Thursday, according to Reuters.

Senate Foreign Relations Committee Chairman Bob Corker, a hawkish Republican from Tennessee, said the extension of ISA ensures President-elect Donald Trump can reimpose sanctions Obama lifted under the nuclear agreement.

He said in a statement on Thursday, "Extending the Iran Sanctions Act ... ensures President-elect Trump and his administration have the tools necessary to push back” against Iran’s “hostile actions.”

Iran has warned that the renewal of sanctions will be a violation of commitments under the JCPOA, and has threatened reprisal if the US extends the longstanding act.

In a public speech on Wednesday, Leader of Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei warned the US against the renewal of the Iran sanctions, noting that the Islamic Republic would respond if the US proceeded to renew ISA which expires at the end of 2016.

“So far, the current US government has committed several violations with regard to the nuclear agreement,” Ayatollah Khamenei told members of the volunteer Basij forces in Tehran, adding, “The most recent of them is the 10-year extension of the sanctions. If these sanctions are extended, it will surely constitute a violation of the JCPOA and they (the US) should know that the Islamic Republic will definitely react to it.”

"'Initiating sanctions' is no different from 'renewing them after their expiration,' and the latter is also [an instance of imposing] sanctions and violation of the previous commitments by the opposite side," Ayatollah Khamenei said.

Last week, Ali Akbar Salehi, the head of the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran, said Tehran has made necessary preparations and is ready to respond if the US violates the deal.

In case of the final approval of ISA, it will “certainly be a violation of the JCPOA,” he added.

Salehi noted that Iran is ready to respond to any US breach of the JCPOA, saying Tehran, however, will make necessary decisions at the appropriate time and after the assessment and analysis of Washington’s moves.

Source : PressTV , CNN


The question is , Why did the Americans waste nearly 2 years negotiating if they were going to tear up the deal in a year ?! . I guess the answer lies in the nature of America and its policy .

According to the JCPOA :

26. The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the respective roles of the President and the Congress, will refrain from re-introducing or re-imposing the sanctions specified in Annex II that it has ceased applying under this JCPOA, without prejudice to the dispute resolution process provided for under this JCPOA. The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the respective roles of the President and the Congress, will refrain from imposing new nuclear-related sanctions. Iran has stated that it will treat such a re-introduction or re-imposition of the sanctions specified in Annex II, or such an imposition of new nuclear-related sanctions, as grounds to cease performing its commitments under this JCPOA in whole or in part.

4.3.2. Sanctions on investment, including participation in joint ventures, goods, services, information, technology and technical expertise and support for Iran's oil, gas, and petrochemical sectors (ISA Sections 5(a)(1)-(2)

4.3.4. Sanctions on the export, sale or provision of refined petroleum products and petrochemical products to Iran (ISA Section 5(a)(3);

This is the second time the West is disrespecting its deals . Once during president Khatami ( another moderate ) and now under the Key-smith Rouhani . I guess the West is leading Iran to rise of another Ahmadinejad and a way bigger nuclear and Balistic missile program after the failure of the so called Moderate government of Rouhani .

Sadly the same Westerners will accuse Iran of terrorism etc etc the same way they did during Ahmadinejad .

[Prodromos]

I signed in specifically to make a post about this. Ah well.

Did you all notice that while the Senate has 100 members, only 99 voted Yes? Well I spent 10 minutes looking for an article that mentioned the sole holdout. Not a single news article mentioned it.

So I went to the Senate's website and searched for the bill, in order to see how every Senator voted. 99 , 0 , and 1 abstained. Can anyone guess who it was that abstained?

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bernie
ing
Sanders

[bigdaddy1204]

I am a bit unsure about exactly what this means - from the wording it made it sound like the US is just giving itself the option to reimpose sanctions rather than actually doing so, although this interpretation may not be correct. If the US is in fact turning its back on the agreement, it's not the end of the world for Iran, as all the other countries (Britain, Russia, China, France, UK) will still have ended their sanctions. So Iran still benefits from the deal, it just means (worst case) that the USA isn't included.

In any case, I think the US should drop the sanctions and relations should be normalised. Iran is one of the few succesful countries in the ME and it's time the US acknowledges that.

[Vanoi]

This is the second time the West is disrespecting its deals. Once during president Khatami ( another moderate ) and now under the Key-smith Rouhani . I guess the West is leading Iran to rise of another Ahmadinejad and a way bigger nuclear and Balistic missile program after the failure of the so called Moderate government of Rouhani .

Not everyone supports the nuclear deal, and the new President elect Trump really doesn't support the Iran deal and will likely destroy the deal and just re-sanction Iran.

[Phier]

This is the second time the West is disrespecting its deals . Once during president Khatami ( another moderate ) and now under the Key-smith Rouhani . I guess the West is leading Iran to rise of another Ahmadinejad and a way bigger nuclear and Balistic missile program after the failure of the so called Moderate government of Rouhani .

Sadly the same Westerners will accuse Iran of terrorism etc etc the same way they did during Ahmadinejad .

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...al-corker-bill

Obama lied and congress played itself. We had to fix some things on Nov 8th, so its going to take a while to sort out what is best for the USA in this circumstance, and one of those things is keeping Nuclear weapons out of Iranian hands.

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

Bernie
ing
Sanders

Thats actually kinda smart, long run no one cares about a 99-0-1 vote and if things go horrible wrong Sanders can claim to be the ONLY one who didn't sign on.

[Roma_Victrix]

http://www.nationalreview.com/articl...al-corker-bill

Obama lied and congress played itself. We had to fix some things on Nov 8th, so its going to take a while to sort out what is best for the USA in this circumstance, and one of those things is keeping Nuclear weapons out of Iranian hands.

Wasn't that what the Iran deal was for? For having the IAEA do regular inspections or uranium enrichment sites in return for the lifting of sanctions? I feel as though we're simply pursuing Israel's pet project instead of looking out for our own best interests here. This is also a rather schizophrenic foreign policy considering how Trump wants to cooperate with Russia in Syria and end the indirect hostilities against Assad (i.e. by halting arms, funds, and training to the Sunni rebels in that country). Russia is also a friend to Iran when it comes to certain international issues.

In either case, it might be a way for Trump to pay lip service to AIPAC, Netanyahu, and the Saudis that he's being tough on Iran while not actually doing anything substantive. The reason that the sanctions had power to begin with was because they were a coordinated effort between France, the UK, the EU, China, and Russia. Since these powers aren't reimposing sanctions on Iran and the US would be acting unilaterally, the economic loss for Iran is negligible.

Thats actually kinda smart, long run no one cares about a 99-0-1 vote and if things go horrible wrong Sanders can claim to be the ONLY one who didn't sign on.

That was my thinking as soon as I saw that. No surprise, either, he's always gone against the grain, so to speak.

In either case, I think you're right BigDaddy1204. This is an older piece of legislation that doesn't necessarily reimpose the sanctions that existed just before the Iran Deal. As the article says, it gives the President the power to do so. Therein lies the difference. However, Trump has made it clear that he intends to reimpose sanctions, so it's more or less on him when he's inaugurated in January and Obama goes into retirement.

Or perhaps I'm wrong about him retiring altogether. Perhaps Obama will open up a restaurant chain called Obama's Grill or something.

[Phier]

Wasn't that what the Iran deal was for? For having the IAEA do regular inspections or uranium enrichment sites in return for the lifting of sanctions?

You should have read the article

We now also know there were secret arrangements between the Obama administration and the mullahs to forgive Iranian noncompliance regarding caps on retention of low-enriched uranium and heavy water. The administration further agreed that the IAEA would no longer provide broad reporting on Iran’s nuclear programs.

Really though, this is where the congress let us down, they got suckered and fell for it.