UN Watch

Nuclear deal in danger — on Trump's UNGA address

U.S. President Donald Trump’s opposition to the Iran nuclear deal is not new. But by choosing his first address at the UN General Assembly

Sep 21, 2017
U.S. President Donald Trump’s opposition to the Iran nuclear deal is not new. But by choosing his first address at the UN General Assembly, in which he listed his administration’s foreign policy priorities, to slam Tehran and the nuclear accord, he has put to rest any hope for improvement in ties with Iran. In his tirade on Tuesday, he called the Iran deal, which the U.S. and five other countries had signed with Tehran two years ago, an “embarrassment”, and “one of the worst and most one-sided transactions the United States has ever entered into”. Unsurprisingly, it triggered a reaction from Iran. Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif called out Mr. Trump’s “ignorant hate speech”, which he said belonged to “medieval times”.
 The message from the Trump administration is clear and consistent: the Obama-era pragmatism was an aberration and the decades-old hostility between the U.S. and the theocratic regime in Tehran stands resumed. The real test before Mr. Trump and the Iranians comes in less than a month. According to U.S. law, the administration must certify the Iran deal every 90 days. The Trump administration has twice done so, and the next deadline is October 15. Mr. Trump has already signalled that he would withdraw the certification next time. If he does so, it would be the beginning of the unravelling of an agreement that was forged after months of intense negotiation.
Failure of the U.S. to respect an international agreement it’s a signatory to would set a dangerous precedent. For all its shortcomings, the Iran nuclear deal is a multilateral agreement. And it has shown results. What had appeared to be an irresolvable issue only three years ago is now settled. International agencies have repeatedly certified that Iran is fully compliant with the terms of the agreement, which means the country is not pursuing any nuclear weapons programme. In plain terms, the deal is a success as it prevented a country with potential nuclear capabilities from developing weapons, and all this without a shot being fired. If the U.S. is serious about non-proliferation, it should use the Iran deal to resolve other complex international conflicts. What’s happening is just the contrary. Iran has been slapped with more sanctions by the U.S. over its missile programme.
 If Iran is not spared even after it agreed to give up a substantial part of its nuclear programme under a multilateral agreement, what message does it send to other countries about international diplomacy? No doubt, Mr. Trump’s continued attack on the Iran deal pleases hard-line supporters at home as well as Arab allies and Israel in West Asia. But it is undermining the global non-proliferation regime and international institutions. Should the U.S. pull out of the Iran deal, it would be a great setback for rules-based multilateral mechanisms.
The Hindu, September 21, 2017

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *

In northeast India, water-management practices to deal with climate change

In a small village on the north bank of the Brahmaputra in Assam in northeast India, farmer Horen Nath stood gazing at his partially submerged paddy field. The floods had kept their annual date but mercifully, the farmer said, the waters have started receding. "The weather has become very strange of late. We always had ample rain,


IMF cuts India's growth projection, but it still retains world's top spot

The International Monetary Fund (IMF) cut India's growth projections for this fiscal year to 7.3 per cent and for the next to 7.5 per cent on Monday, although the country will still retain i...

Tweets about SAMonitor
SAM Facebook