Global IMC Network


Undermining Geneva

Printer-friendly versionPrinter-friendly versionSend by emailSend by emailPDF versionPDF version


Undermining Geneva


by Stephen Lendman


Washington's longstanding imperial agenda remains unchanged. In his January 2002 State of the Union address, George Bush declared Iran, Iraq and North Korea "an axis of evil."


He falsely claimed they "threaten the peace of the world." He lied saying Iran "aggressively pursues (WMDs) and exports terror, while an unelected few repress the Iranian people's hope for freedom." 


Obama repeatedly said Washington will "do what we must to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."


In recent weeks he said "we take no options off the table, including military options."


Washington doesn't negotiate in good faith. Promises made are broken. Dozens of treaties and agreements were systematically violated. Trustworthiness isn't in America's vocabulary. It never was. It's not now.


Obama broke every major promise made. Throughout his tenure, he's pursued regime change in Iran. Believing he altered policy requires a giant leap of faith.


On Sunday, he briefed Netanyahu on Geneva. A White House press release said the following:


"Readout of the President’s call with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu"


"President Obama called Prime Minister Netanyahu today to discuss the P5+1's first step agreement with Iran regarding Iran’s nuclear program."  


"The two leaders reaffirmed their shared goal of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon."  


"The President noted that the P5+1 will use the months ahead to pursue a lasting, peaceful, and comprehensive solution that would resolve the international community’s concerns regarding Iran's nuclear program."  


"Consistent with our commitment to consult closely with our Israeli friends, the President told the Prime Minister that he wants the United States and Israel to begin consultations immediately regarding our efforts to negotiate a comprehensive solution."  


"The President underscored that the United States will remain firm in our commitment to Israel, which has good reason to be skeptical about Iran's intentions."  


"The President and Prime Minister agreed to stay in close contact on this issue as the P5+1 and Iran negotiate a long-term solution over the next six months."


Iranians aren't naive. On November 25, Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) head Ali Akbar Salehi said Tehran will check P5+1 country policies going forward to see if they comply with agreed on terms.


"The Iranian nation and officials in the Islamic Republic's decision-making bodies will move in the framework of the agreement as long as the opposite side complies with its pledges and avoids violating its commitments," he stressed.


Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said:


A negotiated deal doesn't "mean blind trust, and we will do our best to reach a final solution because we shouldn't lose this opportunity."


At the same time, he accused Israel of trying to undermine the deal. Ahead of Sunday's agreement, he posted a Facebook comment saying "there is a high probability the talks would be disturbed through various efforts." 


These efforts reflect Israel's "frustration and warmongering."


On November 25, Reuters headlined "Netanyahu sending security aide to US for talks on Iran." 


At issue is discussing a final nuclear deal. Netanyahu said he "spoke (Sunday) night with President Obama." 


"We agreed that in the coming days an Israeli team led by the national security adviser, Yossi Cohen, will go out to discuss with the United States the permanent accord with Iran."


"This accord must bring about one outcome: the dismantling of Iran's military nuclear capability."


An unnamed official said "Israel intends to be a player" in consultations with Washington and other P5+1 countries. 


The focus going forward will stress forthcoming policy. What's done is done. What follows matters most, he said.


An "Israeli security source told Reuters that the heads of the US Federal Bureau of Investigation and the National Security Agency had both recently visited for secret talks. The US embassy in Tel Aviv declined to comment.


Israel remains hardline. It wants Iran's nuclear program dismantled. It wants permanent deal terms to include:


  • removing Iranian centrifuges;


  • transferring enriched uranium to another country;


  • closing Fordow; and


  • halting Arak heavy water reactor construction.


Don't expect Iran going forward to accept demands harming its interests.


Geneva's "Joint Plan of Action" agreement leaves wiggle room. It's "renewable by mutual consent." Israel aims to take full advantage. 


It'll do so in the weeks and months ahead. It'll press to discredit what was agreed on. It'll go all out to undermine a final deal.


Netanyahu lied saying "only last week, during the talks, the leaders of Iran repeated their commitment to destroy the State of Israel, and I repeat here today my commitment, as prime minister of Israel, to prevent them from achieving the ability to do so."


A Jerusalem Post editorial headlined "The Geneva deal," saying:


It's a " 'bad deal' from Israel's perspective. (It) does not roll back the vast majority of technological advances Iran has made in the past five years that have drastically shortened what nuclear experts call its 'dash time' - the minimum time it would take to build a nuclear weapon if Iran’s supreme leader or military decided to pursue such as path."


"At its best, the deal signed in Geneva might temporarily slow Iran's progress toward nuclear arms capability." 


"More likely it will provide the US and other western nations with a false impression that headway has been made while providing cover for the Iranians as they plod forward toward nuclear capability." 


"Under the circumstances, there seems little cause for celebration."


Haaretz editors tried having things both ways. On the one hand they called Geneva a "historic event."


On the other, they said it "does not end with the signing itself, since the agreement is the start of a long, complex process whose purpose is to uproot the Iranian nuclear program and stop the Islamic Republic's dash to nuclear weapons."


Haaretz editors praised Netanyahu for "convincing most of the world's nations that the Iranian nuclear threat is real, and that an Iranian bomb would endanger not only Israel, but the Middle East and in truth the entire world."


Fact check


Previous articles were explicit. Iran's nuclear program is peaceful. Annual US intelligence assessments say so. IAEA inspections confirm it.


Tehran threatens no one. Israel is the region's only nuclear power. It maintains a formidable arsenal. 


It has sophisticated long-range delivery systems. It threatens the entire region. It threatens humanity. So does America. 


Iran prioritizes peace, stability and long denied normalized relations. Haaretz and Jerusalem Post editors didn't explain. Nor will they going forward. 


Major US media scoundrels substitute managed news misinformation for truth and full disclosure. They suppress what readers most need to know. They're hardline on Iran. Don't expect softening ahead.


Tehran won't get its due going forward. It bears repeating. Expect Israel to go all out to undermine final agreement terms. Attacking Iran remains an option. 


Falsely claiming it violated Geneva terms appears most likely. Perhaps Washington will pursue the same course. Both countries have a long history of duplicity. Don't expect this time to be different.


Israeli Channel 2 Arab affairs correspondent Ehud Yaari believes Geneva isn't "so bad for Israel as some think. (D)espite its faults (it's) beneficial to Israel," he believes.


"...Iranians are moving from a mad gallop toward nuclear broad front" to a slow walk "under supervision - maybe not enough, but pretty close," he said.


The deal "touches all the important points, except the military part of the Iranian military program."


It bears repeating. Iran's program is peaceful. Analysts like Yaari should know it. Whatever they know they don't say. 


Falsely accusing Iran of pursuing nuclear weapons is longstanding Western/Israeli policy. Geneva changed nothing. At most it represents a glimmer of diplomacy. It may not last going forward.


AIPAC broke its silence. On November 25, it headlined US Must Prevent a Nuclear-Capable Iran," saying:


The deal reached on Sunday "raises concerns - including implicit acceptance of Iranian enrichment."


"Congress must pass legislation that will increase the pressure on Iran and ensure any future deal denies Tehran a nuclear weapons capability."


"The US must ensure that Iran does not acquire a nuclear weapons capability. Any final agreement must deny Iran both uranium and plutonium paths to develop nuclear weapons."


"Congress should establish clear consequences - by legislating additional sanctions - should Iran violate this agreement or fail to agree to an acceptable final deal."


"Congress, working with the administration, must strictly oversee the initial agreement and ensure Iranian compliance. In the event Iran violates the agreement, the administration must revoke all sanctions relief."


"Congress must press the administration to ensure all remaining sanctions are fully enforced. The US government:


  • Must not allow Iran to increase oil sales.


  • Must limit repatriation of funds to Iran to the $3-4 billion promised.


  • Must sanction companies that seek to re-enter the Iranian economy except for explicitly permitted activities.


  • Must closely monitor the new humanitarian aid channel to ensure its proper use.


  • Must sanction those that provide support to sanctioned entities, including the IRGC and IRISL."


AIPAC remains hardline on Iran. It's putting enormous pressure on Capitol Hill. It aims to influence administration policy. A White House spokesperson had no comment on its statement.


Some analysts believe Israel is more than ever isolated. Perhaps so. Perhaps not. It has friends in high places. A US/Israeli special relationship persists.


It's longstanding. It's durable. It has its ups and downs. Both countries need each other. It's in their interest to maintain close ties. 


America lacks a reliable Arab partner. Israel is its closest regional ally. A November 24 Jerusalem Post article headlined "Chill out! Relations between the US and Israel are certainly not in a state of crisis."


"In fact, the strategic, religious, cultural, scientific, intelligence and economic ties are stronger than ever before - indeed unbreakable."


Lenny Ben-David wrote the article. He's a former Israeli Washington embassy deputy chief of staff. 


He was AIPAC's information and research director for 10 years. In 1982, he opened Israel's first AIPAC office. He directed it for nearly 15 years.


The Israeli Lobby has enormous influence in Washington. It keeps the special US/Israeli relationship secure. 


It serves the interests of both countries. It does more harm than good. It's not about to change anytime soon. Likeminded policy prioritizes undermining Iranian sovereignty.


Israel wants a regional rival removed. America wants unchallenged dominance. It wants control of Middle East resources. 


It wants subservient puppet regimes replacing independent ones. Longstanding policy hasn't changed. 


Rapprochement with Iran is more illusion than reality. Expect hardline US policies to persist going forward. Geneva's afterglow may prove short-lived.


Stephen Lendman lives in Chicago. He can be reached at 


His new book is titled "Banker Occupation: Waging Financial War on Humanity."


Visit his blog site at 


Listen to cutting-edge discussions with distinguished guests on the Progressive Radio News Hour on the Progressive Radio Network.


It airs Fridays at 10AM US Central time and Saturdays and Sundays at noon. All programs are archived for easy listening.


Random Image

among La Liga at amid 26-10-2013 Online Game, Watch Match FC Barcelona versus Real Madrid C.F.