Israeli plot against Iran-P5+1 deal defeated: Iran FM

By

-

August 12, 2015

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif says the Israeli regime’s plot against Iran’s nuclear agreement with six world powers has been defeated.

Zarif made the remarks on Tuesday upon his arrival in the Lebanese capital of Beirut on the first leg of his regional tour.

He said the nuclear agreement between Iran and P5+1– the United States, France, Britain, China, Russia and Germany – in Vienna last month created a historic opportunity for the countries in the Middle East region to repel dangerous threats such as the Israeli regime and terrorism.

Zarif expressed hope that the conclusion of Iran’s nuclear talks with the world powers would benefit the countries and nations in the region.

On July 14, Iran and P5+1 finalized the text of the nuclear agreement, dubbed the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), in Vienna.

Under JCPOA, limits will be put on Iran’s nuclear activities in exchange for, among other things, the removal of all economic and financial bans against the Islamic Republic.

Zarif also pointed to the Israeli regime, terrorism, extremism and violence as the major challenges facing the countries in the Middle East, adding: “Once more, I call on Muslim countries in the region to respond positively to Iran’s invitation to dialog and cooperation for guaranteeing the interests of regional states and nations.”

He emphasized that the Middle East countries need to hold dialog on how to deal with common challenges.

Zarif said he would exchange views with senior Lebanese officials on regional peace and security and ways to improve Tehran-Beirut cooperation.

He noted that coexistence among Lebanese groups and tribes and the country’s resistance against aggression, extremism and terrorism can set an example for other regional states to follow.

The Iranian minister arrived in Beirut at the head of a delegation on Tuesday on the first leg of the second round of his regional tours following the nuclear agreement between Iran and six world powers.

The Iranian foreign minister will fly to Syria on Wednesday before leaving for Pakistan, India and Russia in the following days.

Iran nuclear accord benefits whole region: Zarif

By

Golrokh Askarieh

-

August 11, 2015

Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif says all regional countries have enjoyed the benefits of the nuclear agreement between Iran and P5+1.

“We have not used the Vienna agreement as an excuse to cause problems for others… The whole region and the friendly, Islamic and Arab countries have all enjoyed the benefits of the accord,” Zarif said in a meeting with Lebanese Prime Minister Tammam Salam upon his arrival in Beirut on Tuesday.

Zarif pointed to his recent visits to Kuwait, Qatar and Iraq immediately after the nuclear agreement, stressing that “regional dialogue” can play a constructive role at this period.

Iran’s top diplomat also voiced Tehran’s support for intra-Lebanese dialog, saying it is the only solution to the political problems in the Arab country.

Salam, for his part, hailed the nuclear accord between Iran and P5+1, adding that “The agreement has provided numerous opportunities for the establishment of peace and stability in the region.”

The Lebanese prime minister also stated that Beirut has always tried to expand its friendly ties with Tehran.

We are ready to open a new chapter in bilateral relations with Tehran after the recent nuclear accord, he stated.

Tehran and P5+1 – the US, Russia, China, France, Britain, and Germany – finalized the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) over the Iranian nuclear program in the Austrian capital city of Vienna on July 14.

During his stay in Beirut, Zarif is also scheduled to visit Lebanon’s Parliament Speaker Nabih Berri and Foreign Minister Gebran Bassil. The Iranian foreign minister will also hold talks with some Palestinian officials in the Arab country.

Zarif will leave Beirut for the Syrian capital city of Damascus on Wednesday. According to reports, he will also visit Pakistan, India and Russia in the coming days.

Islamic Republic victim of terrorism: Rouhani

By

Golrokh Askarieh

-

August 11, 2015

Iranian President Hassan Rouhani has honored the memory of the Iranian diplomats killed by Taliban militants in the Afghan city of Mazar-i-Sharif 17 years ago, saying that the Islamic Republic has been the victim of terrorism from the very beginning.

“The Mazar-i-Sharif incident serves as another piece of evidence that the Iranian nation and officials have always been the victims of terrorism,” Rouhani said in a meeting with the diplomats’ families in Tehran on Tuesday.

Apart from Mazar-i-Sharif, the Iranian embassies and diplomats have also been targeted by terrorists in other parts of the world, he said, adding, “This shows that the Islamic Republic is an anti-terror government and also proves wrong the claim by some countries that Tehran supports terrorism.”

No one imagined at that time that the terrorists might attack and kill Iran’s consulate staff in the northern Afghan city since according to international conventions, the diplomatic centers and embassies are considered safe places, the Iranian president further said.

He also pointed to the role of the intelligence services of certain countries in the Mazar-i-Sharif incident, adding that the terrorists in today’s world once again enjoy the support of Zionists and some Western countries.

Rouhani also vowed that Tehran will never give up its anti-terror bid.

So many of the Iranian elites have been martyred since the victory of the Islamic Revolution and the terrorists are still operating against the Iranian nation and we are reciprocally fighting terrorism, Rouhani stated.

On August 8, 1998, Taliban militants killed 10 Iranian diplomats and an Islamic Republic News Agency (IRNA) correspondent in Mazar-i-Sharif.

Parliament should issue JCPOA fact sheet to minimize risk of arbitrary interpretation

By

Golrokh Askarieh

-

August 11, 2015

The Islamic Consultative Assembly [Iran’s parliament] should issue a fact sheet on the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA) Iran and P5+1 signed in Vienna on July 14 to minimize the risk of arbitrary interpretation of the deal, Mohammad Javad Larijani, who heads the Human Right Council of the judiciary, said in an interview with Tasnim News Agency.

The following is the translation of part of his comments in the interview released by the news agency on August 10:

Statements that the deal should include this or exclude that were only good when the Vienna deal had not been finalized yet. Today we have an agreement on our hands. It is not important what title that agreement carries. What is important is that it is a commitment on the part of the Iranian government and others involved in nuclear talks.

We need to avoid arguments which are useless or impractical. Statements such as the deal would have been better like this or like that should be avoided. This problem cannot be solved, because they (the negotiators) contend it was the best deal they were able to cut.

Comments that the deal should be rejected and arguments that may cause a rift in the country do not serve the country’s national interests. We need to sign off on what the Iranian government has committed itself to. Failure to accept the deal will do considerable damage to the image of the Iranian government on the international stage.

Legal entities including the Supreme National Security Council and parliament, and I emphasize parliament, should review JCPOA, but we need to throw our weight behind government and stand by it because our national interests are of paramount importance.

Some might argue that if we are to accept the deal, we should signal our approval outright. Why should we have discussions? The Supreme Leader has said that the deal should go through the legal process. Is this a formality then? Not at all. In fact, there are very important things that need to be discussed. Let’s assume we want to accept the deal. The question is what we should do to stick to our interests and at the same deny the enemy the opportunity to take advantage of the deal?

Despite arguments by some that the US Congress would kill the deal, I believe a joint meeting of Congress, attended by President Obama – either now or after the president’s veto of the initial congressional act – is very likely to give the Vienna accord the final go-ahead.

Anytime there was an agreement – both in Geneva and Lausanne – the US administration was quick to issue a fact sheet to publicize its interpretation of the deal. Coincidentally, those fact sheets turned out to be the foundation of what happened next. The Americans did this to replace the parentheses – that were to be eliminated – with phrases open to interpretation.

The fact sheets they issued are important because they are mostly supported by Western members of P5+1. This time around, the responsibility to issue a fact sheet lies with Congress. […]

We need to do the same thing in Iran to prevent the American plot from being realized. Arguments by executive officials that parliament should not get involved or by MPs that government should present the deal in the form of a bill to the Islamic Consultative Assembly for approval are waste of time. Government can presented a bill, or parliament can review the deal as part of an urgent motion.

Some might argue that what was signed in Vienna was a joint plan of action and not an agreement. The fact of the matter is that it is a deal that needs the go-ahead of parliament. If one looks too closely at the text of the deal, they may find areas which are somewhat incompatible with our Constitution.

For instance, if we decide to develop a certain area of our nuclear program, something which is in line with our national interests, we have agreed to present our plan to a committee which comprises foreign countries so that it can decide whether we need such development or not. This is against our Constitution. Any decision on what is in our national interest should be ours.

What I am saying is that the Guardian Council should also play an active role in this regard. Why is that many of us are doing nothing in this regard? What I’m saying is that we to approve the deal. But we have approval and approval. There are many things to do. We need to set aside laziness.

I have talked about these things to the parliament speaker. As a former member of the Islamic Consultative Assembly, I would like to call on all MPs not to let this historic opportunity slip. The nation expects them to act. They need to review the deal clause by clause and remove the loopholes the US may want to take advantage of. The chamber needs to put together a 30- or 40-point motion on the deal. One of these points should express support for the deal because such a measure is bound to help the executive branch in the future.

The Supreme Leader has said the case should go through channels stipulated in laws. Parliament has voted for legislation that calls for the deal to be approved by both the Islamic Consultative Assembly and the Supreme National Security Council. These two channels should be active. Parliament should take care of its business in coordination with the Supreme National Security Council. Naturally, the knowledge and experience of who have taken part in the talks should be tapped as well.

Parliament cannot delegate its authority to anyone else. Releasing a fact sheet is the responsibility of the Islamic Consultative Assembly. It would be in the best interest of the establishment to have a bill crafted in parliament to preempt the West and block its potential arbitrary interpretation of the deal.

Our vulnerability goes beyond the red lines we have set. By that I mean, even in areas where the government has respected the red lines, there might be some weak points. The first such weak point is political. The Americans argue that after 36 years of defiance, Iran has now bowed to Western nuclear demands which Tehran has dismissed as illegitimate all along.

The text we have signed off on allows the other side, the US in particular, to take advantage of the deal. For instance, the foreword of JCPOA, in its entirety, mirrors the concerns of the West as if our sole responsibility is to ease those concerns. We should have said the deal should ease our concerns too.

They have told us that we need to prove we are not after nuclear weapons. We, too, should tell them they need to prove that they do not apply double standards, that they do not trample our rights and that they do not discriminate against us. That is what makes this part of the deal unbalanced. We are the one who should always prove our compliance.

Anyone who goes through this text learns that it is open to political misinterpretation. Parliament should focus on this, because such misinterpretation would only be the starting point for the other party to want us to ease Western concerns about human rights, regional issues, Hezbollah, etc.

In other words, to the West this is the beginning of a very important game. Parliament can block this. That the Supreme Leader repeatedly said the talks should only focus on the nuclear case was meant to prevent the other side from taking political advantage of the deal.

Negotiator favors up-or-down vote for nuclear deal in parliament

By

Golrokh Askarieh

-

August 11, 2015

The Iranian parliament should go through the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action clause by clause but at the end of the review process hold an up-or-down vote on the deal, Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araghchi said.

Araghchi, who was a senior member of the negotiating team which represented Iran in talks with P5+1, further said there would be no deal if even a single party to the talks rejected the Vienna accord.

What would happen if the text of JCPOA fails to secure the go-ahead of all seven countries involved in the talks (Iran and P5+1) is anyone’s guess, he said, adding in case of rejection the two sides should decide whether to resume the talks.

He added if the Iranian MPs rejected the deal and told the Foreign Ministry what in the text of the deal prompted them to turn it down, the reason behind their opposition would be raised with the other party. “They [P5+1] will either accept to make corrections, or they may call for the talks to resume.”

Saving Orumiyeh Lake with water from Georgia, Armenia

By

Golrokh Askarieh

-

August 11, 2015

A member of Iranian parliament has said that transfer of water from Iran’s northern neighbors, namely Georgia and Armenia, will help save the world’s largest salt lake, the Orumiyeh Lake, which is on verge of drying up.

“Agreements on the issue have already been signed and water from Georgia and Armenia’s Kera Fountains and Swan Lake will be channeled southward using three pumping stations along the way, all three of which will be on Iranian soil,” said Ali Alilu in a press conference.

He said that transferring water from the Caspian Sea is not economically viable firstly due to the high levels of water pollution and secondly because of high costs associated with such a project.

“The 36 billion cubic meter reservoir of the Orumiyeh Lake has shrunk to two billion cubic meters today and redirecting a portion of water flowing in Aras and a number of smaller rivers will do nothing to save the lake,” he reiterated.

Alilu said that the bulk of the water transfer project needs to be implemented in Iran and the project is predicted to be finalized within two years.

He said that the water will be both bought and bartered from those two countries and the purchased water will flow to Iran at 60 to 80 cubic meters per second.

The MP emphasized that President Hassan Rouhani’s government, especially his Department of Environment (DOE) headed by Masoumeh Ebtekar, has been very successful in its bid to save the Orumiyeh Lake.

“If the drying of Orumiyeh Lake had continued unchecked, as was the case during the previous government, five provinces would have soon faced serious environmental hazards, and a grave human catastrophe,” he said.

Alilu said that making investment to save the Orumiyeh Lake can be viewed as national investment to save the environment, human lives, the cattle and agriculture in six Iranian provinces.

Where does the dispute over JCPOA review come from?

By

Emad Askarieh

-

August 10, 2015

In the days since the conclusion of the Vienna accord, members of the Islamic Consultative Assembly have come up with three ideas as far as the role of parliament in reviewing the Iran nuclear deal goes. These three ideas have to do with differences across party lines in the chamber.

Tabnak.ir, a news website, on August 10 ran an analytical report on political bickering in the Iranian parliament over how to review the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA). The following is the translation of the report in its entirety:

These three views can be reviewed according to the role – lesser or stronger – parliament is given in the review process of JCPOA:

I. Review of JCPOA in a special parliamentary committee, not on parliament floor

II. Review of JCPOA on parliament floor and a ‘yes’ or ‘no’ vote to the general outlines of JCPOA without going into details

III. Review of every single article of JCPOA on parliament floor and possibly changing [parts of] it.

The first view, which has been supported by Speaker Ali Larijani, does not want JCPOA to be reviewed in parliament at all. If there is going to be any review, it argues, it should be held in a parliamentary committee. Days after the conclusion of the deal, the top MP underlined that parliament should not get involved in the review process, saying that the nuclear issue is dealt with under the supervision of the Supreme Leader. He argued that parliament should not be concerned about it, [because] the country’s expediency will be decided on and a report will be submitted to the chamber.

Larijani’s view drew mixed reactions, especially from the principlist critics in parliament. The speaker seems to have gradually backpedalled on his initial stance in recent days, describing parliament’s involvement as a factor which contributes to greater support for the deal and to building a consensus among politicians.

According to the Constitution, the Islamic Consultative Assembly should make comments on such international treaties, he said, adding there are some cases – Resolution 598, for instance – on which parliament has not passed any judgment. We solve the nuclear issue; perhaps it is a better idea if parliament comments, something which will help lend support [to the deal] and form a consensus [in the country], Larijani further said.

His recent remarks and his willingness to have parliament’s comments on and support for JCPOA probably suggest that JCPOA can be reviewed in a special parliamentary committee, because he does not say outright that the deal should be reviewed on parliament floor and just stresses that it is good to have parliament’s view as well. The review of JCPOA in a special committee was raised from the very beginning. Accordingly, a special committee whose members are picked on parliament floor will review the general outlines, not the details, of JCPOA after it wins the blessing of the Supreme National Security Council.

The second view calls for the review of JCPOA on parliament floor, without touching its details. The floor review entails an in-house vote in a plenary session of the chamber with MPs saying a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to the general outlines of JCPOA. Under this arrangement, articles of the deal won’t be reviewed on parliament floor and deputies can merely voice their confirmation of or opposition to the general outlines of JCPOA.

Abbas Ali Mansouri Arani, a member of parliament’s National Security and Foreign Policy Committee, says, “Deputies will provide a simple yes or no answer to one question on JCPOA: Do you approve of JCPOA?. They will only voice their agreement or opposition. Except this, nothing will be discussed in the open session of parliament, and the MPs will not allowed to get involved in [the review of] the text. Any changes to JCPOA’s text, even the slightest, require all six countries [which made up P5+1] to come together and make comments on those changes. This is not feasible”.

The third view, which is mainly pursued by members of the Islamic Revolution Stability Front, says the government should submit JCPOA in the form of a bill to parliament and then deputies should review the details and every article of JCPOA on parliament floor. It also allows MPs to make changes to the deal. If JCPOA cannot be changed, it should be either accepted or rejected in its entirety.

Mohammad Soleimani, an MP who is also a member of the Islamic Revolution Stability Front, explained this view in comments he made in parliament, “By getting involved in the text and making well-reasoned and responsible comments in favor or against the text, the Islamic Republic of Iran will know that what it is going to sign.

“I wonder why some, especially in the government and a member of the negotiating team, are concerned about parliament’s involvement in [reviewing] the text. What is it in the text that should not be made public? Who would stand to lose if people and MPs learned about the upsides and downsides of the deal and voted for it insightfully?

“An expert review of JCPOA should focus on the text and let go of marginal issues, speeches and slogans. The negative aspects of the text of the deal cannot be sugarcoated through double-dealing. Contradictory, ambiguous speeches and interviews will not help carry out a task that requires expertise.

“Is it possible not to be concerned after [hearing] baseless and misleading claims that Fordow, Arak and Natanz [Iran’s three nuclear facilities] are inefficient? Breakthroughs and glories cannot be downplayed by simplification, double-dealing, and offering the proverbial worthless thing to charity. The country should not be left in the grip of problems in the future. Denying parliament its legal right is not acceptable no matter who does it, the government, parliament’s Presiding Board or the chiefs of caucuses in the chamber.”

Markooh Castle, a tourist attraction in northern Iran (PHOTOS)

By

Fatemeh Askarieh

-

August 10, 2015

Markooh Castle in the heights of the Alborz Mountains near the city of Ramsar is an old military fortress that dates back more than eight centuries.

To get inside the castle one needs to climb some 300 stairs. Unfortunately, this historical site has not been thoroughly studied by archeologists.

Markooh Castle is visited by many tourists each year and is one of the most beautiful tourist attractions of the Caspian province of Mazandaran.

Images of the castle posted online by the Iranian Students’ News Agency:

Iran top commander: ISIL will eventually disappear from the region

By

Golrokh Askarieh

-

August 10, 2015

The chief of staff of the Iranian armed forces has said that ISIL will be eliminated following the developments expected to unfold in the region.

Major General Hassan Firouzabadi made the comment in an interview on Sunday and added that the terrorist group and its allies will be history in the future. Tasnim News Agency on August 9 published the top general’s remarks, and the following is the translation of part of his comments on developments in four Arab nations, namely Syria, Iraq, Yemen and Bahrain:

Syria

Thank God, the key breakthroughs Damascus has achieved on different fronts have injected new life into the central government in Syria which has proved steadfast and capable of maintaining the country’s national interests and respecting its constitutional boundaries.

The Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant (ISIL) and its allies are crumbling under the pressure of developments which are expected to play out in the country down the line.

Iraq

Mischievous measures are being taken in this country. The respected people of Iraq, Sunnis and Shiites alike, should remain vigilant. The existing shortages are not genuine. A call for street protest – sparked by certain groups which are mostly non-Muslims – an explosion targeting power lines transferring Iranian electricity to Iraq and other acts of sabotage are all aimed at showing the inefficacy of the country’s central government.

Yemen

The resistance [movement] in Yemen will be the [ultimate] winner and measures by those opposing the Yemeni people will lead nowhere. At times, they make headlines by the money they spend on what they seek and by the mobilization of hired mercenaries, but such developments have no root in Yemeni soil and in the hearts of its people. These measures will fade as fast as they have happened.

Bahrain

The situation on the ground has shown that “the one-vote-for-each-citizen” demand cannot be suppressed. The Bahraini government has to reach an agreement with the country’s elite before the opportunities slip away. It should also release popular leaders from jail to steer the developments in the right direction and serve the interests of the Bahraini government and people.

Volunteer rescue operation to save fish stranded in Zayanderud (PHOTOS)

By

Fatemeh Askarieh

-

August 10, 2015

In cooperation with the provincial Department of Environment Protection in Isfahan, a group of environmentalists tried Sunday to save fish trapped in ponds of Zayanderud, the largest river in the central plateau of Iran.

Snapshots of volunteers involved in the rescue operation released online by Tasnim News Agency: