Tuesday, April 14, 2015

Eye on Iran: Senate Leaders and White House Make Their Cases on Iran Deal Legislation








Join UANI  
 Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter View our videos on YouTube
   
Top Stories

NYT: "Leaders of the Senate Foreign Relations Committee negotiated into the night on Monday to soften language and possibly shorten a congressional review period in legislation that would give Congress influence over the shape of President Obama's nuclear accord with Iran. The Iran Nuclear Agreement Review Act, Congress's first legislative effort to muscle into the continuing talks to rein in Iran's nuclear program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions, will formally go before the committee on Tuesday afternoon. Senator Bob Corker, Republican of Tennessee, the panel's chairman, and Senator Benjamin L. Cardin of Maryland, its ranking Democrat, pushed to reach bipartisan consensus by Tuesday morning, then join forces to stave off threats to the bill from the right and the left. A Democratic aide familiar with the negotiations said Monday night that Mr. Cardin was optimistic that a bipartisan accord would be reached by morning. To try to get there, Mr. Corker and Mr. Cardin focused on watering down two provisions. One would require the president to certify every 90 days that Iran is not supporting terrorist attacks against Americans, an issue that has not been part of the nuclear negotiations. The other would prevent the president from waiving any sanctions until the expiration of a 60-day congressional review period." http://t.uani.com/1NCtRdc

Bloomberg: "Lawmakers skeptical about an Iran nuclear deal said U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's plea for more time to complete an agreement did little to dissuade them from insisting that Congress must review any final plan. After a two-hour private briefing Monday for House members on the Iran deal by Kerry, Treasury Secretary Jacob Lew and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz, several Republicans said Congress deserves a vote and that many questions about the framework for an accord are unresolved. 'I really am concerned' the deal could let Iran become a nuclear state, said House Armed Services Chairman Mac Thornberry, a Texas Republican. 'I think that's a real problem.' ... The three secretaries will hold a similar session for senators Tuesday. The briefings are part of a White House effort to fend off interference from Congress that might thwart negotiations over the next three months on a final deal... House Majority Leader Kevin McCarthy, a California Republican, said if the Senate passes that measure, the House of Representatives will take it up and can pass it with 'high numbers.'" http://t.uani.com/1DZ4JZv

WT: "The U.S. and Iran are still sparring over whether and when economic sanctions will be lifted in the wake of a nuclear deal, but some of Tehran's traditional trading partners aren't waiting for the gates to officially swing open again. Turkey's president traveled to Tehran last week for meetings that produced eight accords on commercial and industrial cooperation. China is preparing a deal to build a long-delayed natural gas pipeline between Iran and Pakistan, to start once sanctions are eased. A trip by India's commerce minister to Iran last week produced an invitation for Indian Prime Minister Narendra Modi to visit for a state dinner to discuss expanded economic ties. Russia became the latest - and most controversial - country to seek economic deals with Iran when President Vladimir Putin said Monday that he was lifting the ban on a long-stalled $800 million missile agreement. Then there are Iran's vast oil holdings that are bottled up because of the sanctions... Real estate developers and financing banks in Dubai, such as Damac Properties Dubai Co. and Dubai Islamic Bank PJSC, for example, are making plays for Iranian properties. Dubai will get a 5 percent boost to its economy from lifting sanctions on Iran, according to Hasnain Malik, the head of frontier-markets equity strategy at Exotix Partners LLP in Dubai." http://t.uani.com/1yqNZrY

   
Nuclear Program & Negotiations

Fars (Iran): "Director General for Political Affairs at the Iranian Foreign Ministry and nuclear negotiator Hamid Baeidinejad... underscored the necessity for the removal of all sanctions against Tehran, and stressed that 'all the EU, US and UN Security Council sanctions will be terminated on the first day that final nuclear deal comes into effect', if any such agreement is struck between Iran and the six world powers. Noting that 'Iran holds no trust in the US', Baeidinejad said, 'We only negotiate on equal footing.' He also emphasized Tehran's determination to continue Research and Development (R&D) activities after a possible nuclear deal with the G5+1, and said 'Iran will continue nuclear fusion technology' even after a final deal with the powers.'" http://t.uani.com/1DZ8lef

Mehr (Iran): "Iran's senior nuclear negotiator has told a group of students in Islamic Azad University fact-sheet publishing is conditioned on the authorities' approval. Hamid Baeidinejad responded to nuclear questions on Monday in a meeting with Islamic Azad University Medical School students. Baeidinejad told the students that fact-sheet was prepared before and would be published whenever the higher authorities of the country agreed to.  On a question whether a period of six months would be enough for implementation of provisions of comprehensive deal, Baeidinejad said that negotiators were far from addressing the details of the agreement deal; 'with the same token, I would not give you an assessment of the time needed for implementation of the provisions,' he added. Baeidinejad, however, believed that definitely the six-month period would seem unrealistic, and that 'Iranian side would consider shorter time period.' On a different question about remarks by US Secretary of State John Kerry who said that they would be committed to articles of their fact-sheet, nuclear negotiator told the reporters that the US fact-sheet was different from Iranian fact-sheet, and was an interpretation of the joint statement; 'our fact-sheet is what has been said by our officials,' he said." http://t.uani.com/1aZGcXO

WSJ: "The White House is increasingly arguing that partisanship is driving Republican opposition to the emerging Iran nuclear agreement, a tack that suggests President Barack Obama has determined that peeling off Democratic support is the best way to defeat legislation that would curb his authority to strike a deal with Tehran. 'There are a lot of members of Congress who, quite frankly, are not willing to evaluate this deal on the merits. They evaluate this deal based on whether or not President Obama supports it and, if he does, then they're going to oppose it,' press secretary Josh Earnest said Monday. 'That's the kind of partisanship that has infected so much of what this president has tried to do over the course of the last six years. And it's unfortunate that it's emerging in the context of such a critical national security priority for the United States. But the fact is that's what happening.'" http://t.uani.com/1NCLV6W

WSJ: "Some Senate Democrats are pushing to shorten the amount of time Congress would have to review a final nuclear deal with Iran under legislation due for a committee vote on Tuesday... Sen. Chris Coons (D., Del.) said he backs a proposal to halve the review period to 30 days after a final deal is reached... 'Now that we've got the broad outlines of the framework and are getting more thorough briefings from the White House, we should be able to review and provide input on the bill responsibly in 30 days or less,' Mr. Coons said. Mr. Corker declined to comment on whether he would support shortening the congressional review period, but said there was a 'likelihood' that he would reach an agreement on a package of amendments worked out with Sen. Ben Cardin of Maryland, the committee's top Democrat. The two spoke over the weekend extensively on the phone, Mr. Corker said." http://t.uani.com/1csbIOB

WSJ: "Iran thinks that Russia will deliver its powerful S-300 surface-to-air missile systems this year, Ali Shamkhani, secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, told the Interfax news agency in Moscow on Tuesday. The comment comes a day after the Kremlin lifted the ban on delivery of S-300 missile air-defense system, which cast doubt on the international effort to curb Iran's nuclear program and sparked criticism from the White House. 'I think that [the S-300] will be delivered this year,' Mr. Shamkhani said according to Interfax. 'The elimination of this issue will foster further development of our bilateral relations,' he said. Mr. Shamkhani also said that 'great strategic possibilities exist in the relations between Russia and Iran.' However, Nikolai Patrushev, one of Russian President Vladimir Putin's top advisers and Russian Security Council secretary, told Interfax that delivery of the missile system 'will take some time.' When the systems will be delivered 'depends on our manufacturers. I think it will be a minimum of half a year to finish the work,' he told the news agency." http://t.uani.com/1yqCKQe

AFP: "Israel on Monday denounced Russia's decision to lift a ban on supplying Iran with sophisticated S-300 air defence missile systems as proof of Tehran's newfound 'legitimacy' following nuclear talks. 'This is a direct result of the legitimacy that Iran is receiving from the nuclear deal that is being prepared, and proof that the Iranian economic growth which follows the lifting of sanctions will be exploited for arming itself and not for the welfare of the Iranian people,' Israeli Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said in a statement... 'As Iran disavows clause after clause of the framework agreement... the international community has already begun implementing easing measures,' he railed. 'Instead of demanding that Iran stop its terrorist activity in the Middle East and the world, it is being allowed to arm itself with advanced weaponry that will only increase its aggression.'" http://t.uani.com/1Deo3hS

Free Beacon: "Russia's announcement on Monday that it will proceed with the sale of advanced missile systems to Iran crosses a so-called 'red line' established by the Obama administration in 2010, according to comments by senior administration officials. Following years of dissent from the United States, Russia announced on Monday that it would proceed with the sale of the advanced S-300 air defense missile system to Iran, which has been vying to purchase the hardware for years... Russia's decision to arm Tehran with the S-300 system erodes a long-promoted narrative by the Obama administration about its success in preventing Russian proliferation. One senior Obama administration official speaking in 2010 described the S-300 sale as a 'red line' for the United States that 'couldn't be crossed,' according to Foreign Policy." http://t.uani.com/1NCCFjg

Reuters: "Nuclear talks between Iran and world powers will resume on April 21 at the deputy level, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said on Tuesday, in what will be the first meeting since a major breakthrough two weeks ago... 'My colleagues, with the deputy to (European Union foreign policy chief) Federica Mogherini and other political directors from the E3+3 will get together next Tuesday to start drafting,' Zarif said during a visit to Madrid... Zarif did not specify where the coming round of talks would take place." http://t.uani.com/1NCz2K8

Congressional Action

Bloomberg: "Senator Bob Corker said he wants a Senate panel to vote Tuesday on a bill that would give Congress 52 days to review, and potentially reject, a nuclear arms deal with Iran before sanctions are lifted against the Islamic republic. 'Those congressional sanctions cannot be waived until Congress completes its work,' Corker, a Tennessee Republican and chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, said on Bloomberg TV Tuesday... He declined to say whether or not the bill -- which appears to have enough votes for passage -- had the support of enough Democrats to reach the 67 senators needed to override a presidential veto. 'We'll see,' he said. 'I don't ever count my chickens before they're hatched.'" http://t.uani.com/1cshj7i

Sanctions Relief

Bloomberg: "As world powers move toward ending Iran's international isolation, bargain-hunting stock investors are circling. The primary focus for many of them, though, isn't Iranian companies themselves, but rather multinationals that are located in nearby countries as well as those that have kept ties with the Islamic republic during sanctions. Their business, the thinking goes, would get a big lift from an opening up of the Middle East's second-biggest economy... The biggest beneficiaries could include banks and developers in Dubai and a Malaysian shipper that may see orders climb if Iran resumes global oil exports. Here are 16 stocks identified by analysts at firms including Exotix Ltd., Global Securities and Erste Securities Istanbul as potential winners." http://t.uani.com/1NCO7v7

Regional Destabilization

Arab News: "Saudi Ambassador to Bahrain Abdullah Al-Asheikh said that leaders of the Gulf Cooperation Council (GCC) will inform the US administration, during their expected joint meeting at Camp David later this spring, that they will not be silent if they find the Iranian nuclear deal threatens their countries, adding, 'In this case, we will do our best to stop it.' At the same time, the ambassador hoped that the result of Camp David summit between US and GCC leaders would convince the US administration to take its allies' interests in the Middle East into account. He also clarified that the US must know GCC leaders' visions to protect their security and stability... 'We disagree with countries who seek to dominate, expand into our countries and interfere in our internal affairs. This is what has been done by Iran and we will protect our nations, and our security and stability. We are capable of doing it,' he added." http://t.uani.com/1ynlfQE

Human Rights

IHR: "Eight prisoners were hanged in Alborz province (west of Tehran) this morning, reported the Iranian state media. According to the official website of the Judiciary in Alborz Province, the prisoners who were executed this morning were all convicted of drug-related charges... According to reports by Iran Human Rights (IHR), at least 2052 prisoners have been executed between 2010 and 2014. Drug convicts are tried by the Revolution Courts behind the closed doors and many of the prisoners are sentenced to death based on the confessions they have given under torture." http://t.uani.com/1OvHgR7

IHR: "Six prisoners have been hanged in two different prisons according to the official Iranian sources... The judiciary in Markazi province (central Iran) reported about the execution of four prisoners convicted of drug-related charges on April 12... According to unofficial reports 16 prisoners were hanged in the Ghezelhesar prison of Karaj (west of Tehran) early Monday morning April 13. All these prisoners were convicted of drug-related charges." http://t.uani.com/1DDLeUf

Opinion & Analysis

WashPost Editorial: "We're guessing it's not a coincidence that the latest, disturbing report about Jason Rezaian, The Post's unjustly imprisoned correspondent in Iran, comes just after the government of Hassan Rouhani accepted a preliminary accord on the country's nuclear program. On Sunday, the Fars news agency, which is believed to be close to Iran's Revolutionary Guard Corps, issued a dispatch saying that Mr. Rezaian faced charges of 'espionage' and 'acting against national security.' It went on to sketch a case against the reporter that would be laughable were it not being used to justify an outrageous human rights abuse. Not for the first time, Mr. Rezaian looks like a pawn in Iran's domestic power struggle over the nuclear deal. That makes it all the more urgent that Mr. Rouhani demonstrate his ability to control his opposition by arranging Mr. Rezaian's immediate release. Mr. Rezaian, who was born and raised in California, had been jailed for 265 days as of Monday, far longer than any Western journalist previously detained in Iran. In violation of Iranian law, he still has not been brought to trial, and prosecutors have never officially reported the charges against him. He was denied the lawyer chosen by his family, and his court-approved attorney has not yet met with him... What's clear is that Mr. Rezaian continues to be held in Tehran's notorious Evin Prison long after Mr. Rouhani's foreign minister, Mohammad Javad Zarif, described him as ' a good reporter ' and expressed the hope that ' he will be cleared in a court of law .' Again the question arises: If Mr. Rouhani and his foreign minister cannot stop the persecution of an American journalist they know to be innocent, can they be counted on to deliver on the commitments they made in the nuclear talks?" http://t.uani.com/1JGPzH8

WSJ Editorial: "Vladimir Putin blew a geopolitical raspberry at the Obama Administration on Monday by authorizing the sale of Russia's S-300 missile system to Iran. The Kremlin is offering the mullahs an air-defense capability so sophisticated that it would render Iran's nuclear installations far more difficult and costly to attack should Tehran seek to build a bomb. Feeling better about that Iranian nuclear deal now? The origins of this Russian sideswipe go back to 2007, when Moscow and Tehran signed an $800 million contract for delivery of five S-300 squadrons. But in 2010 then-President Dmitry Medvedev stopped the sale under pressure from the U.S. and Israel. The United Nations Security Council the same year passed an arms-embargo resolution barring the sale of major conventional systems to the Tehran regime. That resolution is still in effect, but the Kremlin no longer feels like abiding by it. With the latest negotiating deadline passed and without any nuclear agreement in place, Moscow will dispatch the S-300s 'promptly' to the Islamic Republic, according to the Russian Defense Ministry. So much for the White House hope that the West could cordon off Russia's aggression against Ukraine while working with Mr. Putin on other matters. Russia and the West could disagree about Crimea and eastern Ukraine, the thinking went, but Washington could still solicit the Kremlin's cooperation on the Iranian nuclear crisis. State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki dismissed news in February that Russia's state-run weapons conglomerate Rostec had offered Tehran the Antey-2500-an upgraded version of the S-300 system. 'It's just some reports,' she said. White House spokesman Josh Earnest similarly boasted in March of how 'international unanimity of opinion has been critical to our ability to apply pressure to Iran.' Now Mr. Obama wants to delegate responsibility for enforcing his nuclear deal with Iran to the United Nations, which means that the Russians will have a say-and a veto-there, too. Think of this missile sale as a taste of what's to come." http://t.uani.com/1Ho0t5p

President of Yemen Abdu Rabbu Mansour Hadi in NYT: "My country, Yemen, is under siege by radical Houthi militia forces whose campaign of horror and destruction is fueled by the political and military support of an Iranian regime obsessed with regional domination. There is no question that the chaos in Yemen has been driven by Iran's hunger for power and its ambition to control the entire region. The Houthi attacks are unjust acts of aggression against the Yemeni people and the constitutional legitimacy of my government, as well as an assault on Yemen's sovereignty and security. The Houthi rebels are puppets of the Iranian government, and the government of Iran does not care for the fate of ordinary Yemenis; it only cares about achieving regional hegemony. On behalf of all Yemenis, I call on the agents of chaos to surrender and to stop serving the ambitions of others. It is not too late to stop the devastation of my nation. The Houthis belong at the negotiating table, not on the battlefield terrorizing their fellow citizens... Two weeks ago, Yemen was on the brink of the abyss. The unprecedented level of Arab and international support brought us back from the edge. The message they are sending is clear: Iran cannot continue expanding at the expense of the integrity and security of other countries in the region. Our neighbors are certain of what they see: one house in the neighborhood is on fire, and that fire must first be contained and then extinguished lest the entire neighborhood turn to ashes. We will need continued international support to ensure military might on the battlefield now. And we will need assistance for our civil institutions once the fighting has stopped, to return my government to leadership in the capital, Sana. Having a hostile government in a nation bordering the Bab al-Mandeb strait - the highly trafficked shipping lane leading to the Suez Canal - is in no nation's interest. If the Houthis are not stopped, they are destined to become the next Hezbollah, deployed by Iran to threaten the people in the region and beyond. The oil shipments through the Red Sea that much of the world depends on will be in jeopardy, and Al Qaeda and other radical groups will be allowed to flourish." http://t.uani.com/1GGTuFw

Eric Edelman & Tzvi Kahn in Politico: "Unfortunately, past American efforts to enforce arms control agreements offer reason to doubt that the United States will actually hold Iran accountable for any violations-just as Khamenei's speech suggests that Tehran will take full advantage of this. One 1987 arms control agreement between the United States and Russia is a case in point. The Intermediate-Range Nuclear Forces (INF) Treaty, which requires both Washington and Moscow to eliminate ground-launched missiles with a range of 500 kilometers to 5,500 km, marked the culminating point of a tense Cold War standoff and was a key milestone toward its end. Yet for years, Russia has sought to subvert it. In 2005, Russian Defense Minister Sergei Ivanov asked his American counterpart, Donald Rumsfeld, for his views about the possibility of Moscow's withdrawal from the INF. The discussion was not merely academic. As the Financial Times reported at the time, 'The fact that Russia's military establishment was considering such a radical break with a pillar of the international arms control regime reflected a serious deterioration in relations between Russia and the West.' In subsequent years, Russia would continue to express discontent with the treaty. In 2006, Ivanov called the treaty a relic of the Cold War. In 2007, he said that Russia was weaker because of it, while President Vladimir Putin asserted that it should be transformed into a global treaty. In 2008 the Bush Administration joined with Russian in an effort to do just that at the United Nations, with no takers. In May 2012, after a failed attempt the year before, Russia successfully test-launched the RS-26 Rubezh (Russian for 'frontier') missile at a distance of 5,800 km - a distance far enough to qualify as an intercontinental ballistic missile (ICBM), which the INF does not prohibit. But subsequent tests of the Rubezh featured a modified, heavier payload that reduced its range to approximately 2,000 km, which the INF Treaty does prohibit, thereby signaling a prior, longer-term Russian intention to violate it. In 2013, the Obama administration inexplicably dismissed claims that the Rubezh test-launch may have violated the INF. It was not until January 2014 that American officials shifted course and informed NATO of a potential Russian INF violation, and not until July of the same year that the State Department officially accused Russia of violating the Treaty. In congressional testimony last month, Defense Secretary Ashton Carter further acknowledged the violations. 'The INF Treaty is a two-sided treaty,' he said. 'They said they wouldn't do something. We say we wouldn't do something. And they've done what they weren't supposed to do.' This sad case study offers useful lessons for any prospective nuclear deal with Iran. While Moscow telegraphed its intentions, the United States ignored that reality. After Russia breached the treaty, the Obama White House initially refused to acknowledge that it had done so. After the administration finally acknowledged Russian violations, no consequences followed. Similarly, for decades, Tehran has violated its nuclear commitments - and the United States has failed to hold it accountable." http://t.uani.com/1CUZ0NB

Paula Desutter in Pittsburgh Tribune-Review: "Iran has been violating its obligations under the Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty for over 30 years. Its nuclear program has been found to be for the purposes of acquiring or manufacturing nuclear weapons and not, as Iran has consistently claimed, to be for peaceful purposes. President Barack Obama and Secretary of State John Kerry, however, have a plan to make this problem go away: a nuclear deal based on the April 1st Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). Rather than continuing or expanding the increasingly successful U.S. and international sanctions regime designed to pressure Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons ambitions and deny Iran the funds to advance its program, the U.S. and the international community will declare Iran's nuclear program to be for peaceful purposes. Iran will again commit to implement obligations it has already violated and will be permitted to continue its nuclear program, albeit at a modified pace. In return, the U.S. and international sanctions regime will be castrated. Obama administration claims of achievement and praise by supporters should be tempered by the fact that it doesn't take a genius to reach a deal with a violator that legitimizes its violations and removes the consequences.  While the administration has touted the 'unprecedented' verification of this agreement, verification will be by the same International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) Iran has lied to for decades and which has never detected an undeclared Iranian nuclear facility. The inspection and transparency measures in the JCPOA are mostly restatements of obligations Iran has previously agreed to and then 'suspended.' IAEA reports over the past decade show that Iran has concealed its program and facilities and responded to IAEA inquiries with false or misleading statements. Thus the record of Iran's dealings with the IAEA is remarkably bad. Iran knows the likelihood of re-imposition of sanctions by nations that have already paid the price for imposing them once is low. Moreover, the JCPOA provides for a 'dispute resolution process.' Once compliance problems are taken into this process, they are unlikely to result in the promised 'snap-back' of sanctions." http://t.uani.com/1aZIDtl

Marc Thiessen in WashPost: "Remember Jonathan Gruber, the Obamacare architect who as caught on tape boasting how the president had taken advantage of the 'stupidity' of American voters to pass his health-care law? Well it seems, Obama is applying the 'Gruber Doctrine' once again - this time to foreign policy. The Gruber Doctrine is based on the premise that, in the words of the now infamous MIT professor, 'lack of transparency is a huge political advantage' and that the 'basic exploitation of the lack of ... understanding of the American voter' is 'really, really critical' for enacting your preferred policies. That is precisely what Obama is doing when it comes to Iran and Cuba. With Iran, the administration is once again relying on a 'lack of transparency' to ram through its nuclear deal. Even Iran's foreign minister dismissed the administration's talking points describing the framework agreement as 'spin.' Obama is warning that the only alternative to his deal is 'another war in the Middle East,' even though he has yet to reveal the key details: Will sanctions relief be front-loaded, as Iran insists, or will sanctions come off gradually, as the Iranians meet certain performance benchmarks? Will there be any transparency into Iran's past secret nuclear activity, information that is critical to verifying its compliance today? Will there be 'snap inspections' and access to all Iranian facilities, both civilian and military? Iran says no. Obama is counting on the fact that Americans won't be able to follow all the details about 'centrifuges' and 'domestic enrichment capacity.' He won't share the details but wants us to trust him that there will be 'unprecedented verification.' If you believe that, you probably still think that if you like your health plan, you can keep your health plan." http://t.uani.com/1OafmZ9

UANI Outreach Coordinator Bob Feferman in Times of Israel: "Centrifuges are not the only thing spinning in Iran. The ink was not even dry on the framework announced between Iran and the P5+1 when Iranian officials began to dispute the fact sheet released by the White House. The vast differences between the sides on this flawed and dangerous deal are already setting off alarms across the Middle East and throughout the world. An important resource that highlights the discrepancies among three versions of the framework released by the non-partisan advocacy group United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) should raise serious concerns. Take for example the issue of inspections of Iranian facilities conducted by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)." http://t.uani.com/1NCOztn
        

Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com

United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons.  UANI is an issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of nuclear weapons.

No comments:

Post a Comment