![]() ![]() “America’s partners and allies in the region, especially the Gulf states and Israel, are extremely concerned that a renewed nuclear deal will empower Iran at a time when the United States is perceived to be stepping back from the region,” Leavitt wrote recently. ![]() Jettisoning the designation presents a “messaging problem” at a difficult moment, according to Matthew Levitt of the Washington Institute for Near East Policy think tank. sanctions.īut the move carries potent political symbolism, for Iran, for the United States and for Iran’s foes in the Middle East.Īs for possible domestic political reaction in the United States, the Biden administration recognizes “they would get creamed” if the terrorism designation was lifted without conditions, one former U.S. Most former officials and regional analysts say lifting the terrorism designation on the IRGC would have little practical effect as the organization would remain under a myriad of other U.S. has introduced an array of sanctions against the IRGC and individuals in the force over its ballistic missile program and alleged terrorism and human rights violations. troops in Iraq and supplying weapons and training to proxy forces in Syria, Lebanon and Yemen. government has accused the Revolutionary Guards of killing hundreds of U.S. Congress decided to “test the proposition,” he said, and now the Biden administration is grappling with the aftermath.Īfter nearly a year of negotiations, Iran and the U.S., Britain, France, Germany, Russia and China managed to mostly resolve the question of which sanctions would be lifted in accordance with the original deal - except for the blacklisting of the IRGC. from imposing terrorism, missile and human rights sanctions,” said Goldberg, now a senior adviser at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies, a think tank. “The broader problem here is the Obama administration was adamant that nothing could prevent the U.S. Former Obama administration officials at the time argued against the legislation, warning it could undermine the formula underpinning the 2015 nuclear deal. ![]() president to sanction the Revolutionary Guards. In 2017, lawmakers from both parties backed legislation that introduced new sanctions on Iran and laid the foundation for a U.S. would retain the authority to impose sanctions on Iran unrelated to its nuclear program, including targeting organizations allegedly supporting terrorism. In 2015, when President Barack Obama’s administration made the case for the deal, officials said the U.S. Richard Goldberg, who served in the Trump White House national security council and strongly opposes reviving the JCPOA, said the impetus for imposing additional sanctions against the Revolutionary Guards and other entities initially came from Congress, before the Trump administration pulled the U.S. But officials at the time said the sanctions were designed to hammer Iran as part of a “maximum pressure” campaign to force more concessions from Tehran and to weaken the regime. sanctions while adding new sanctions as well.Ĭritics accused the Trump administration of intentionally introducing “poison pill” sanctions that would make it difficult for the next president to restore the accord. The 2015 deal, known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA, imposed strict limits on Iran’s nuclear program in return for an easing of economic sanctions, including releasing Iranian funds blocked in foreign banks. ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |