بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم
Answer to Question
Trump's Withdrawal from the Nuclear Deal
We know that America is a state of institutions and that the outlines of America in international politics are governed by the institutions of governance in America, and not by the president. How do we explain that America ratified the nuclear agreement with Iran and considered it as a victory, and now Trump has withdrawn from it and considered it a victory? Please explain this, and accept my thanks and appreciation.
Yes, the outlines of America in international politics are governed by institutions and not by the president personally, and although the president's style is prominent in producing the decision, but what was not mentioned in the question is the basis on which these guidelines are based, and they give the answer to the question. The basis of the state of institution is the interests of America. If, in a certain circumstance, an agreement is required, the institutions approve it and the president approves it. If America's interests require canceling this agreement, the institutions approve the cancellation and the president approves the cancellation.
1- Iran was important to maintain the tyrannical regime of Bashar, America's agent, until America finds the alternative. America feared popular movements in Syria that raised the slogans of Islam and the rule of Islam, it was afraid that the tyrant would fall and the rule of Islam is established in Syria and the American influence would disappear from the region, especially when the pace of popular movements in the year 2015 escalated and advanced from place to place... Thus it wanted to highlight the role of Iran and remove its sanctions to enable Iran to play the role assigned to it.
Therefore it was in America's interest to sign that agreement to remove the obstacles in front of Iran. It was a humiliating deal to Iran in every way. What confirms this the most is what followed the signing of the agreement on 14/7/2015, when the US President Barack Obama made a televised speech in which he said:
* that with the deal "every pathway to a nuclear weapon is cut off”... It would oblige Iran to “ remove two-thirds of installed centrifuges and store them under international supervision
* get rid of 98% of its enriched uranium
* accept that sanctions would be rapidly restored if the deal was violated
* permanently give the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access "where necessary when necessary" (BBC 14/7/2015)
We have clarified the purpose of America's nuclear agreement with Iran in the Answer to a Question on 22/7/2015 after the Security Council approved the agreement on 20/07/2015, we said:
“All of this indicates that America's goal behind this agreement is to ease and facilitate matters for Iran through the lifting of sanctions and anchoring its open relationship with it so that it can continue to play the role that would make it easier for America’s work, lightens its burdens and provides a cover for its games with the states and peoples in the region. Therefore Iran will implement the American policy in practise as the case in Iraq, Syria and Yemen however instead of this being implemented from behind a curtain that obscures sight as it had been (before the agreement), it will now take place behind a transparent curtain or no curtain at all!”
Indeed, Iran has played a dirty and criminal role for America in these countries, in Syria, Iraq and Yemen, and it was prominent and public under the false slogans of resistance and under the incitement of sectarian hatred.
Thus, it was in America's interest then to conclude that agreement to facilitate the economic situation of Iran and enable it to implement the American plans in the region actively and with reassurance that sanctions will be lifted from it; especially since the situation of Syria was about to go out of the American influence due to the weak regime of the tyrant Bashar. Thus the required role was that Iran gets active in its defense while being reassured of the lifting of sanctions from it. Bashar’s position in 2015 was fragile and he was almost toppled, so the US held a nuclear agreement with Iran to activate its role in Syria on 14/07/15. And not only that, but it brought in Russia’s militarily after Obama's meeting with Putin on 30/09/2015 and giving permission for Russia to intervene to prevent the fall of Bashar's regime until there is a US alternative agent..
2- But America’s perspective has changed now that Bashar's position is in the upper hand. This has created another perspective for the Trump administration, especially what America has achieved directly or indirectly in Iraq and Syria against the people of the two countries seeking liberation. There is no longer any need to give Iran a direct role, because the situation now has changed, which began at the end of the Obama era after he gave the direct role to the regimes in Turkey and Saudi Arabia.
Their conspiring against the Syrian revolution was more serious than the weapons of Russia, Iran and its party, and the Syrian regime, that worked to weaken the revolution, but the Turkish regime and that of Saudi Arabia was able to achieve victories for the regime in twisted ways, what made Iran lag behind the natural role that managed the situation alone ahead of Turkey and Saudi Arabia... Thus, America decided to make the role of Iran complementary rather than the only leading role, and this is evident in the agreements of Astana. And so it managed to stop the Syrian revolution under the name of stopping the escalation. This is one of the reasons for America’s withdrawal announcement from the nuclear agreement with Iran, where the interest of America requires withdrawing from the agreement in preparation for new conditions to reduce the Iranian role in the region. And this required Trump to inflate Iran’s benefit from the nuclear agreement, to show that he wants to withdraw because this agreement, according to his claim, helps Iran to acquire nuclear weapon, And accordingly Trump claimed on 08/05/2018 when announcing the withdrawal from the nuclear deal with Iran in a televised speech that, “If I allowed this deal to stand, there would soon be a nuclear arms race in the Middle East” and “No action taken by the regime has been more dangerous than its pursuit of nuclear weapons” he continued:
“In theory, the so-called “Iran deal” was supposed to protect the United States and our allies,... the deal allowed Iran to continue enriching uranium and”. He also said:
“Iran’s leaders will naturally say that they refuse to negotiate a new deal; When they do, I am ready, willing, and able” and he said: “we have engaged extensively with our allies and partners around the world... After these consultations, it is clear to me that we cannot prevent an Iranian nuclear bomb” “Therefore, I am announcing today that the United States will withdraw from the Iran nuclear deal”. “The deal does nothing to constrain Iran’s destabilizing activities...In a few moments; I will sign a presidential memorandum to begin reinstating U.S. nuclear sanctions on the Iranian regime”.
He went and signed the memorandum and said: “The agreement was so poorly negotiated... The Iran deal is defective at its core... The deal’s sunset provisions are totally unacceptable. As we exit the Iran deal, we will be working with our allies to find a real, comprehensive, and lasting solution to the Iranian nuclear threat... this disastrous deal gave this regime — and it’s a regime of great terror — many billions of dollars” (Sputnik, Al-Jazeera 8/5/2018)
Here it is crystal clear that Trump intended to make false statements and exaggerate the capabilities of Iran, in order to justify the withdrawal from the nuclear agreement with it, without expressing the real reason; which is that America's interest now requires to reduce the role of Iran and reduce its role in the region, but it should remain ready for the implementation of what is required by the US. This is repeated in US policy, America changes its policies in accordance to its interests, such as what happened with Russia after Obama's meeting with Putin on 30/09/2015 and commissioned him to enter Syria to help with the mission in Iran; i.e. to maintain Bashar's role, Russia's readiness for this role to enter was authorized by America. But when Russia tried to exploit its role to appear as it is self-acting away from America, it was in America's interest to "discipline" Russia so that it realizes its size, and so were those military strikes!
As we have shown in the Answer to a Question on 14/04/2018, “...The American strike is more of a discipline to Russia than a strike on Syrian chemical weapons. About ten sites were struck at dawn today.
However, some comments by military experts in the media this morning stated that few of these sites are chemical plants or research centers, but the majority was military sites.” Thus changing of the American policy according to its interests is very well known.
3- Another matter that America’s interest required, which is America wants to divert the attention away from the Jewish crimes by the occupation of Palestine and Al-Quds (Jerusalem), and America has long sought to transfer its embassy to Jerusalem, but it was waiting for a two-state solution and the division of Jerusalem, so it was postponing the transfer of the embassy. But now America sees a different political solution to the problem instead of the two-state solution, by introducing alterations and “touches” and other solutions that it calls the deal of the century. And this requires the of what was approved previously by America to transfer its embassy to Al-Quds (Jerusalem), and America wanted to reduce the sensitivity around this matter and so it focused on Iran and amplified its role, and that was in conference with the (ruwayibidha) rulers on 21/05/2017, when Trump addressed the leaders and representatives of 55 states in the Islamic world, to justify the implementation of the signing of agreements of reconciliation between the Jewish entity and the Saudi regime and other regimes, and to move to apply a certain solution to the Palestinian issue that is not yet announced by America. And the Saudi regime is promoting it and pressurizing the Palestinian Authority to accept it, that is, Trump focused his work to make Iran the enemy instead of the Jewish entity the usurper of Palestine, the land of Isra and M’iraj. So Saudi Arabia followed Trump and supported what he said and promotes it ... So it is in America's interest to exaggerate the subject of the nuclear agreement, as if it is not an agreement humiliating Iran, but an agreement that gives power for Iran. Noting that what the deal covered, not even Trump and others will be able to find a deal more humiliating than this for Iran.
It has been noted that America is focusing on Iran as an enemy in the region instead of the Jewish entity. For example, when the recent demonstrations in Iran, America focused on the demonstrations and rode the wave; noting that the Iranian role in the region is a carefully studied American policy, and by America riding the wave of protest demonstrations in Iran was not intended to change the regime, but for other purposes, which we explained in the Answer to a Question on 11/01/2018:
“...So why did America ride the wave and exploit it? This is important for two reasons:
The first is to divert attention from Palestine and Trump's statement about Al-Quds “Jerusalem” and to occupy the region with the issue of Iran. So, it becomes the enemy number one in the region, and then the focus falls on Iran and less so, if not diminishes from the Jewish entity, the usurper of Palestine.
The second is to find a justification for the survival of America's agents in the region under the pretext of standing against Iran and protecting America from the danger of Iran. Trump's statement about Al-Quds (Jerusalem) and that it is the capital of the Jewish entity (the most in enmity of those who believe) as we said in our leaflet from 7/12/2017 is a slap on the backs of the America’s agents “Al-Quds (Jerusalem) is in the hearts of Muslims and their minds, and the silence of those agents on Trump's statement and their persistence to be agents pleasing to America are big scandals for them ... Trump's statements against Iran was the straw they cling on to justify their continuation to be pro-American agents despite Trump's statement about Jerusalem ... by saying that Trump stands in Iran’s face, the archenemy, is an excuse worse than the crime.
(قَاتَلَهُمُ اللَّهُ أَنَّى يُؤْفَكُونَ)
“May Allah destroy them; how are they deluded?” [Al-Munafiqun: 4]”
4- America was the instrumental gauge in the nuclear agreement, Europe accepted the American formulation of the agreement and only agreed that it would sign it by being one of the signing parties, that is, Europe surrendered and accepted it just to survive! We clarified the position of Europe during the negotiations of the nuclear agreement in the Answer to Question 22/07/2015, and we said then:
“...As such there was nothing left before the Europeans, once they had comprehended that they could not prevent the American Iranian nuclear agreement or have an effect upon the American influence, except to move towards Iran to gain the booty by winning investments and projects within it since they (Germany) are suffering from financial constraints and through these it is possible for them to work inside Iran through the long-term in order to regain the European influence or some of it there alongside the American influence...”
Thus, Europe exploited the agreement and opened up to Iran commercially. The trade balance between Europe and Iran has therefore increased, and trade with America relatively decreased before the agreement and during sanctions. This was the third reason that made Trump rush to cancel the deal as a blow to Europe, especially in terms of trade ... Trump announced on May 7, 2018 in a tweet on Twitter that he decided to bring forward the date on the Iranian nuclear agreement from May 8-12.
It is noteworthy that this step came because of the European moves in an attempt to discourage him from withdrawing from the nuclear agreement. The website "Al-Arabi Al-Jadeed" cited, موقع إكسيوس alalam.ir website that “... the Secretary of State of America, Mike Pompeo told his European counterparts, the French, British and German on Friday 4/5/2018 of President Trump's intention to announce the withdrawal of his country from the nuclear agreement, and he rejected the understandings formulated with US negotiators during the past months in terms of a possible amendment to the agreement.” America did not accept to understand and cooperate with the Europeans, and did not care about them, and this indicates that it has other accounts and wants to distance the Europeans, and not to cooperate with them on this subject.
5- Europe has realized that the cancellation of the agreement will inflict significant commercial damage leading to the political damage, and therefore it exerted effort to meet with Trump to discourage him from withdrawing. Macron went to America and tried to dissuade the US president from withdrawing from that agreement, but failed. He was followed by Merkel, and have made concessions to America but they were not accepted. The European position emerged as weak. Britain then contacted Macron and Merkel, and declared that they were upholding the Iranian nuclear agreement. Then the British Foreign Minister, Johnson, visited America and announced that the world was more secure with the existence of the agreement than without it. Britain began to move strongly. So Trump expedited the date to show his position on the agreement from May 8-12 to stop the movements of Europe, and he went on with his announcement, and did not give the Europeans weight, because the American institutions saw in these a motive three reasons for America to cancel the agreement.
6- The reactions were as follow:
a. Europe is saddened, full of regret and anxiety! German Chancellor Angela Merkel said that she took note with regret and concern of President Donald Trump’s decision to pull the United States out of the landmark 2015 Iran nuclear accord, and she said: "We will remain committed to this agreement and we will do everything necessary to ensure that Iran complies with it. Germany made this decision in cooperation with Britain and France," she added. “The solution is in having a common dialogue "and that" Europe has to assume more responsibility in foreign and security policy.” "She stressed that Germany" will do everything in its power to ensure Tehran's adherence to its responsibilities under the nuclear agreement and noted that Tehran has been fulfilling it so far and said that the Iran nuclear deal should not be questioned but that there should be talks about a broader agreement that goes beyond the original accord." (Reuters, 9/5/2018).
She announced Europe’s disappointment for its failure to America and its concern about the consequences of its withdrawal from the agreement. The Europeans, as mentioned above, moved at the highest level towards America to discourage Trump from the decision to withdraw and tried to consider Trump through the proposal to negotiate with Iran again, but he did not respond to them, but surprised them by the date of announcing his position on the agreement. Thus the Europeans showed weakness in front of America.
Then, during the second week of May 2018, there were conflicting European statements reflecting their discontent and dismay at the withdrawal of the United States. On the one hand some statements made showed the sense of challenge, Federica Mogherini, the European Union's foreign policy chief, said: "I am particularly concerned about the announcement tonight of the new Trump Declaration." Adding, "The European Union is determined to act in accordance with its security interests and to protect its economic investments,"... We will maintain this nuclear agreement in cooperation with the rest of the international community," In his reaction to Trump’s decision, French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, said: “The deal is not dead...France, Germany and Iran will hold a meeting on Monday (14/5/2018) to discuss the latest developments, and Iran's ballistic missile program and other issues, but at the same time must keep the nuclear agreement, stressing that the International Atomic Energy Agency attests to Iran's respect for the agreement." (Al-Jazeera 9/5/2018).
Britain, France and Germany issued a joint statement showing their unified position: “Together, we emphasise our continuing commitment to the JCPOA. We urge all sides to remain committed to its full implementation and to act in a spirit of responsibility, including ensuring the continued economic benefits associated with the agreement for the Iranian people." (Al-Jazeera 9/5/2018).
"Washington's decision to withdraw from the nuclear agreement does not change our position, and we have no intentions to withdraw," Johnson said in his country's parliament. "I urge the United States to avoid any action that could prevent other parties from continuing to implement the agreement, including In the interest of our collective security." (Guardian 9/5/2018) These positions show that Europe will challenge and stay committed to the accord!
On the other hand, some European statements showed retreat, leniency and fear for their companies. "It will be difficult to abide by the nuclear agreement without America," said Norbert Roitgen, head of international policy at Merkel's party. Norbert added that anyone who “invests in Iran will face harsh sanctions by the United States, and the price can not be compensated.” He warned saying “Therefore, the affected companies will probably quickly stop their investments or withdraw from the country altogether”. (Der Spiegel, Germany, 9/5/2018).
French Foreign Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian, said on 9/5/2018 on RTL Channel that: “Iran had agreed to impose restrictions on its nuclear activities in return for economic benefits that the Europeans will try to preserve. And that the authorities will meet with French companies operating in Iran in a few days to discuss how we can help their operations in Iran to try to protect them as much as possible from American actions," and thus the Europeans expressed concern about the fate of their economic gains.
b- The Iranian position is somewhat relatively calm, and it did not lean to Europe. The Iranian President Hassan Rowhani described Trump's decision as a "psychological war and economic pressure." He said, "We will not allow Trump to win the psychological war and the economic pressure on the Iranian people," he said, “that his country remains committed to the nuclear agreement without America, provided Iran is assured within weeks that it will get the full benefits of the agreement by getting the guarantee from the rest of the parties. And we will wait several weeks before discussing with our allies and with the rest of the parties to the nuclear agreement with whom we are in talks with. The whole matter depends on the guarantee of our interests if it is assured we will continue to move in the agreement, but if the agreement is only on paper and does not guarantee the interests of the Iranian people then we will have a clear path" (Iran's official television 9/5/2018).
Iran's Shura Council Speaker, Ali Larijani said: "Europe has already succumbed to American pressure, which led to the withdrawal of many of its companies from Iran under previous international sanctions between 2012 and 2015 ... We cannot put much confidence in their statements about maintaining the agreement, but it is worth the test for several weeks to make it clear to the world that Iran has tried in every way to reach a peaceful political solution." (Deutsche Welle, 9/5/2018) Iran is not confident in European positions and commitment, it is afraid for its interests, and if sanctions are applied, it will be harmed.
C - Russia has not consolidated its position against Tramp with the European positions, and declared its position alone. "Russia is very disappointed with Trump's decision ... there are no and there can be no grounds for canceling, The agreement that showed its full effectiveness ... and that Moscow is ready to continue to cooperate with the other parties in the nuclear agreement and will continue to develop its relations with Iran"(Al Jazeera 9/5/2018)" Foreign Minister Lavrov said.
And it speaks timidly about cooperation with other parties, i.e. the European parties who did not contact Russia; they decided to meet and negotiate with Iran without it. Thus the Russian position is in a critical situation, it cannot go with America in this matter, because it is contrary to its interests and policy towards Iran and it cannot go with the Europeans who are straining relations with Russia so that it is not used by America against them to isolate them.
d- As for China's position, China's special envoy to the Middle East, Gong Xiaosheng said: "All parties involved in the nuclear agreement with Iran must abide by it and use dialogue and negotiations to resolve the dispute, and his country is ready to enhance cooperation among all signatory countries," (Xen-Kho 9/5/ 2018). This is an ambiguous public statement, which China has not sided with it to the European countries opposed the withdrawal from the agreement. But it has equated American and European positions with this statement. China is not counted on for its weak international stance towards America and it is thinking about its trade relationship with America.
In Conclusion: Trump has not announced his withdrawal from the agreement because the nuclear agreement is a victory for Iran and for the interest of Iran and to raise the status of Iran, but the fact of the agreement as it is in the time of Obama a humiliation to Iran and a shameful concession from its nuclear project. But Trump announced the withdrawal from the agreement because the interest of America has required the three factors mentioned above:
A - The need for the Iranian role, especially in the year 2015. This is no longer needed now as it was in the year 2015.
B - Amplifying the American hostility to Iran, especially in front of Saudi Arabia and its likes to shift the hostility from the Jewish entity to hostility with Iran...
C- To discipline Europe, especially in terms of trade, because Europe exploited the agreement by the opening of trade with Iran and the relaxation of trade relations with America.
America and the West, like their predecessors, the Kuffar and polytheists, do not fulfill a covenant and do not keep a contract, but they break the covenants and contracts every time, and they are not fearful. Where are they from the values of Islam and its rules that oblige fulfilling the contracts and the covenants, Allah (swt) said:
(يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَوْفُوا بِالْعُقُودِ)
“O you who have believed, fulfill [all] contracts” [Al-Ma’ida: 1].
Truly humanity today, after the Kuffar spread corruption in the land is, oppressing the people and destroying every living and non-living thing, need the Islamic Khilafah Rashida state, (rightly guided Caliphate) which fulfills the contracts and preserves the covenants and spread between people justice, security and safety...
Muslims rise for its establishment, by it is glory, victory and empowerment, and truth is what the Messenger of Allah (saw) said when he described the Caliph as a protection of the Ummah from all ills, weakness and humiliation:
«إِنَّمَا الْإِمَامُ جُنَّةٌ يُقَاتَلُ مِنْ وَرَائِهِ وَيُتَّقَى بِهِ»
“The Imam is a shield behind whom you fight and protect yourself.” [Narrated by Muslim from Abu Hurayrah may Allah be pleased with him]
27 Sha’ban 1439 AH
- Sino-American Trade War is a Struggle for American Supremacy
- How can a System Ever be Viewed as Successful When Over 2 million of its Own Children Live in Homes Where They are at Risk of Harm?
- Wilayah Syria: Women's Demonstration in Deir Hassan, Idlib in Support of Daraa
- The Regime Failed to Cover its Scandals ...So, Terrorism Returned with Live Ammunition
- Britain: The Khilafah will make Pakistan an Economic Giant!