Skip to main content

More Iran confrontations inevitable, Israeli defense official says

Today, we will just try to digest the grim picture that Iran International  has posted in the past two days, including the title, More Iran-Israel confrontations inevitable, and the following. 
        US Secretary of State Marco Rubio and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in Jerusalem on September 15 pledged unity and opposition to Iran and blessed a European initiative to restore United Nations sanctions on Tehran over its nuclear activities. Rubio said he supported the European initiative "100%."  Rubio said if the Islamic Republic does not "change course," the administration will continue to apply "maximum pressure" sanctions. 
        Iran’s Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said at the Iran-Economic Cooperation Organization (ECO) conference on September 16 that possible negotiations with the United States will hinge on Washington’s readiness for a deal based on mutual interests without threats or intimidation. 

Does Rubio speak for Trump? Does Trump care what happens with Iran after he ‘obliterated’ its nuclear program? One thing is clear: the U.S. and Iran will not be talking by the ‘snapback’ cutoff date. So, the E3 are left hanging. One imagines they will have to swallow their pride and push for a UNSC resolution that extends RES/2231 with continued 'snapback' mechanism. What will the U.S. do? Netanyahu will be pushing hard on Trump (and Rubio) for the U.S. to veto any extension resolution. If I had to bet, it would be for another U.S. pro-Israel veto and ‘snapback’ sanctions. And then all hell may break loose.

Comments

Post a Comment

Popular posts from this blog

‘New war with Israel at any moment’, ‘still digging through rubble’

The news about Iran has taken an ominous tone in the last couple days. Here is some reporting and commentary.  Newsweek on August 18, 2025, reported that Yahya Rahim Safavi, senior military adviser to Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, said ‘ We are not in a ceasefire; we are in a stage of war. No protocol, regulation, or agreement has been written between us and the U.S. or Israel. A new war with Israel could break out at any moment .’  Yonah Jeremy Bob commented in The Jerusalem Post on August 19, 2025, that ‘ Khamenei can either “drink from the poisoned chalice” of diplomatic concessions … or face more airstrikes, possibly next time some targeting him directly ’.   Bob also noted that ‘ right now Iran is still digging through rubbl e’. The U.S. attacked Fordow, Natanz and Esfahan on June 22. Two months of digging. No surprise that there has been no public news about that.
Post a Comment
Read more

Assessing possible outcomes of the snapback mechanism

The initiation by the E3 of the 30-day snapback mechanism in the UN Security Council makes everything more difficult and there is great uncertainty about the outcome. Will it be peaceful with a new nuclear deal with Iran, negotiated by the U.S., endorsed by the UNSC and verified by IAEA, or will Iran withdraw from NPT with further military action by Israel and the U.S.?                 To perhaps shed a little light on what the outcome will be, here is my analysis of how the players - Iran, U.S. and E3 - may be assessing the acceptability of the range of outcomes. Four levels of acceptability were used: 1 Fully acceptable; 2 Less acceptable; 3 Just acceptable; and 4 Not acceptable. Four near term 30-day outcomes are listed, and two optimistic outcomes with an interim U.S.-Iran agreement reached within a 6-month extension.                 For the 30-day near term, the best outcome would b...
Post a Comment
Read more

‘Making nuclear fuel’ under the NPT

It is with some hesitation that I take issue with the latest publication of the renowned Henry Sokolski and Sharon Squassoni on August 15 in the Bulletin of Atomic Scientists, titled: “ Actually, the NPT doesn’t guarantee a right to make nuclear fuel .”  But someone should defend the IAEA and international safeguards! Here are points in question.            ‘ The [NPT] treaty was designed to prevent dangerous bombmaking activitie s.’  NPT is far more complex than that. It is common to state the three pillars of NPT: nuclear disarmament; nuclear nonproliferation; and peaceful uses of nuclear technology. Nonproliferation involves the commitment of non-nuclear states not to pursue nuclear weapons and to accept IAEA inspection to confirm that commitment is being followed. Perhaps Sokolsky intends to refer to INFCIRC/153, which lays out how IAEA and the state cooperate to carry out that confirmation. If so, INFCIRC/153 is not designed to ‘prevent’...
Post a Comment
Read more