Tag: javad zarif
Special Envoy for Climate John Kerry

Why Are The New York Times And Politico Promoting A Fake Kerry Scandal?

Reprinted with permission from Media Matters

The New York Times and Politico are helping spread a manufactured scandal against former U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry, now the White House's special climate envoy, over the manifestly absurd claim that he disclosed secret Israeli operations in the Syrian civil war to Iran's foreign minister.

In articles posted on Monday, the Times and Politico played up attacks on Kerry by Republican politicians such as Sens. Dan Sullivan of Alaska and Rick Scott of Florida, as well as former United Nations Ambassador Nikki Haley. By focusing on this aspect to their coverage, they are doing exactly what Fox News is demanding for other media outlets to follow its lead.

In addition, the Times and Politico pieces gave little consideration to the obvious objection that the information was not secret — even though both outlets had reported on the strikes before. (And so did Fox.)

Kerry has issued a strongly worded denial, saying that such an exchange never happened:

Iran International, a United Kingdom-based outlet, first reported on a leaked interview recording of Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, who claimed that military leaders kept him in the dark about Israeli strikes on Iranian assets in Syria and that he learned of the strikes from Kerry. According to the outlet, this claim is "not very credible," since those attacks were already reported via international media.

An analysis in the right-wing Jerusalem Post saw through the problem in Zarif's claim as well: "The idea that Zarif was told information on Israeli airstrikes by John Kerry and that he didn't know about airstrikes on Iranian convoys in Syria appears ridiculous. Does he not read his own Iranian media? Does he not have any sources inside his own ministry? … Is he the most uninformed foreign minister in the world?"

But in its latest story on Kerry's denial and Republican political attacks, the Times played down the extent to which the strikes have been public knowledge — which if emphasized, would have cast doubt on both Zarif's version of events and any notion of Republican outrage.

"Israel has made little effort to deny years of strikes attributed to it by Syria's government, news outlets and nongovernmental organizations tracking the Syrian conflict," the paper said. In fact, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu admitted to the strikes on a hot microphone during a meeting with Eastern European leaders in 2017, with further public admissions in 2018 and early 2019. The Times also could have noted that the Israeli military publicly acknowledged in September 2018 that it had struck over 200 Iranian targets since just 2017 — let alone the time period before that — but the paper instead chose to be vague on just how public this knowledge is.

Instead the Times simply noted: "A New York Times article from 2019 included similar information on the number of Israeli strikes." Besides the hair-splitting over the particular number, the Timespreviously reported on Israeli strikes against Iranian targets in Syria multiple times in 2013 and also reported in 2018 on the escalating conflict between the two countries. But instead, it referred to just one of its articles from 2019, which happened to include information the Israeli military had already divulged the year before.

Politico followed a similar pattern, covering the story as more of a political back-and-forth in a piece headlined "GOP tears into Kerry amid Iran controversy," without acknowledging the fact that these attacks were already public knowledge.

And while it noted in the seventh paragraph that "Zarif's version of events has not been independently corroborated," one of the asterisks it attached to his remarks was that it is "also unclear whether Kerry allegedly revealed the Israeli operations to Zarif before they were publicly reported by Israel itself in 2018."

This framing depicts the Israeli actions in Syria as having been some kind of secret. In fact, Politico itself had casually mentioned the fact of the Israeli strikes over the years.

But noting such facts now would get in the way of media narratives that rely on covering political squabbles while treating partisan and opportunistic accusations as if they were legitimate.

Iran Nuclear Deal Threatens Israel’s ‘Survival,’ Netanyahu Says

Iran Nuclear Deal Threatens Israel’s ‘Survival,’ Netanyahu Says

By Batsheva Sobelman and Laura King, Los Angeles Times (TNS)

JERUSALEM — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Friday renewed his harsh criticism of the preliminary nuclear pact with Iran, declaring it a danger to his country’s existence.

Hours before the start of the Passover holiday, which begins at sundown Friday, Netanyahu huddled with his “security Cabinet” — made up of his most senior ministers on military, diplomatic and security issues — to discuss the framework agreements signed in Lausanne, Switzerland on Thursday.

“The Cabinet is united in its opposition to the deal reached with Iran,” Netanyahu said in a statement issued after the meeting. “This deal would pose a grave danger to the region and to the world, and would threaten the very survival of the State of Israel.”

Although Netanyahu showed no sign of softening his stance, some Israeli commentators described the nuclear agreement’s preliminary terms as surprisingly favorable.

“If the framework presented becomes the final agreement … even Israel could learn to live with it,” commentator Ron Ben-Yishai wrote on the Ynet website. However, he cautioned, “we must be wary of appearances_too many key issues still remain unresolved.”

Under the framework accord, Iran is to sharply curtail its uranium enrichment capacity in exchange for an easing of punitive sanctions that have devastated its economy.

Before the outlines of the deal were announced, Israel refused to rule out a unilateral strike to quell Iran’s nuclear ambitions. Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz said Thursday that “if we have no choice, we have no choice,” adding, “The military option is on the table.”

Some observers, though, said such talk amounted to little more than bluster.

“The time has come to stop fantasizing and to connect with reality: Israel does not have a military option to destroy the Iranian nuclear program,” columnist Nahum Barnea wrote in Friday’s editions of the Yediot Ahronoth daily. “Even if it had such an option in the past, it expired.”

Some commentators suggested that President Obama’s decision to call Netanyahu to discuss the accord could signal a potential thaw in icy relations between prime minister and the White House_a rift that has been greatly exacerbated by the Iran nuclear issue. The Haaretz daily, however, characterized the two leaders’ conversation as “difficult.”

The prime minister infuriated the U.S. administration earlier this month when he defied White House wishes and delivered a speech to a joint session of Congress lobbying against the president’s plan to try to strike a deal with Iran. Some urged Netanyahu to take advantage of an opportunity to get back in good graces with the U.S., saying such a course of action would allow Israel to wield more influence over the final shape of the accord.

Amos Yadlin, a former head of Israeli military intelligence, told Israel’s Channel 10 that Netanyahu should pursue a “grand strategy” of cooperating with the U.S. on the Palestinian issue and curtailing settlement activity outside established blocs, or risk further alienating Washington.

“The danger is that the disconnect with the U.S. will lead to a poor agreement with Iran, all for the sake of building in remote settlements that Israel will never keep in a future agreement,” Yadlin said.

Others, though, said it would be difficult now for Netanyahu to climb down from his fierce opposition to any deal — particularly as he seeks to keep right-wing allies happy as he sets about forming a government in the wake of his party’s electoral success earlier this month.

In Iran too, backers of the accord were having to contend with criticism from hard-liners. Foreign Minister Mohammed Javad Zarif, who returned to Tehran on Friday from the Lausanne talks, sought to calm opponents, declaring in a tweet that “the solutions are good for all, as they stand.”

Special correspondent Sobelman reported from Jerusalem and staff writer King from Cairo. Special correspondent Rahim Mostaghim contributed to this report from Tehran.

(c)2015 Los Angeles Times, Distributed by Tribune Content Agency, LLC

Photo: Benjamin Netanyahu addresses the U.N. General Assembly. September 27, 2012. (UNIC / John Gillespie via Flickr)

Marathon Talks Produce Broad Outline Of A Nuclear Deal With Iran, Officials Say

Marathon Talks Produce Broad Outline Of A Nuclear Deal With Iran, Officials Say

By Paul Richter, Tribune Washington Bureau (TNS)

LAUSANNE, Switzerland — Marathon talks have produced the “key parameters” of a historic nuclear deal with Iran, officials said Thursday.

Officials said Iran agreed to a series of steps to sharply lower the threat that it could produce enough enriched uranium, or produce plutonium, as fuel for nuclear weapons for ten to fifteen years.

The International Atomic Energy Agency, the United Nations nuclear watchdog, would have regular access to all of Iran’s nuclear facilities in a regime of intense monitoring and inspections.

Most U.S. related sanctions would remain for the duration of the deal, but United Nations sanctions would be lifted more quickly if it complies with its obligations.

President Barack Obama, speaking in the Rose Garden, hailed what he called a “historic understanding with Iran” that if fully implemented, “will prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”

“It is a good deal, a deal that meets our core objectives,” Obama said.

Obama said that even if Iran cheats, the arrangement extends the time it would need to develop a bomb from two or three months to at least a year, giving the outside world time to intervene.

“This deal is not based on trust,” Obama said. “It’s based on unprecedented verification.”

The preliminary accord, the officials said, sets the stage for an additional three months of international diplomacy aimed at a forging an agreement to ease economic sanctions on Iran in exchange for limits on its ability to build a nuclear weapon.

The officials made the announcement after an all-night negotiating session and eight days of intense talks in Lausanne, Switzerland, between Iran and six world powers.

Earlier in the day, as talks between Iran and six world powers entered their eighth straight day, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said the diplomats had narrowed their differences in overnight wrangling between Secretary of State John F. Kerry, the Iranian team and European officials.

In a potentially positive sign, French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius returned to this lakeside city late Wednesday, and German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier canceled a trip to the Baltic region that had been delayed to remain at the negotiations. If there is an announcement of a deal Thursday, at least some of the foreign ministers would want to be present.

The diplomats are seeking a preliminary outline of a deal that would ease sanctions on Iran if it accepts restrictions aimed at preventing it from obtaining a nuclear weapon. If they complete the first-stage agreement here, they hope to fill in all details of a comprehensive deal by June 30.

“We are moving,” Zarif declared earlier Thursday, as he emerged from long hours of talks just before 6 a.m.

Marie Harf, Kerry’s spokeswoman, said on Twitter that the session was “truly an all-nighter.” After more than eight hours of talks, the diplomats broke for about three hours of sleep, then resumed their meetings.

Diplomats cautioned that the talks, which have veered between optimism and gloom all week, could again stall. The negotiations have been slowed by differences between the six powers and Iran, and differences among the world powers.

Fabius, returning from Paris on Wednesday night, said negotiators remained “a few yards” from the finish line.

The Obama administration is under enormous pressure to demonstrate progress in the 18-month-old talks before Congress returns April 14 from a break. Skeptical lawmakers say that unless they see proof of progress, they will seek votes on two measures the administration believes could sink the talks.

Kerry still has two weeks to nail down the preliminary deal. But it may be easier to try to solve differences now than to try to bring diplomats back to Switzerland next week.

The White House, in an acknowledgment that the talks were skirting the edge of collapse, said Wednesday that Obama was prepared to take a new approach if progress was not possible.

Josh Earnest, the White House press secretary, said that while U.S. officials still see signs of progress, “if we are in a situation where we sense that the talks have stalled, then…the U.S. and the international community is prepared to walk away.”

But for the administration, the challenge is not just to get an agreement, but to reach one that demonstrates that the two sides are resolving the big issues that stand between them.

Administration officials have promised that they would explain to the public the decisions they have made. Earnest has said U.S. officials would describe how they intend to deal with dangers presented by the major Iranian nuclear sites.

But it appears likely that key issues, such as the handling of Iran’s stockpile of low-enriched uranium, will remain unresolved as the negotiations enter their final months.

Some analysts — including former members of Obama’s team — have said they are concerned that the deal could be less than advertised. That would further complicate the administration’s struggle to sell the deal to Congress and allies, when it is already under fire from critics.

Kerry is fabled for his dogged approach to diplomacy. During his last attempt to work out a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians, Israeli officials joked ruefully about Kerry’s habit of showing up and simply waiting in hopes of wearing down the other side.

This may not be an auspicious week for a deal. A deal signed Wednesday might have been derided as the April Fool’s agreement. And Thursday is the 13th day of the Iranian new year, Zeizdah Bedar, considered an unlucky day for Iranians.

Photo: Olivier Douliery via TNS

Iran Leader Says GOP Senators’ Letter Implies U.S. ‘Not Trustworthy’

Iran Leader Says GOP Senators’ Letter Implies U.S. ‘Not Trustworthy’

By Ramin Mostaghim and Alexandra Zavis, Los Angeles Times (TNS)

TEHRAN — Iran’s foreign minister on Tuesday said that a letter from 47 Republican senators warning that any agreement on the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program must receive congressional approval suggests that the U.S. is “not trustworthy.”

The open letter released Monday also warned Iran’s leaders that the next U.S. president could revoke a deal reached with President Barack Obama.

“This kind of communication is unprecedented and undiplomatic,” Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said, according to a state-run television website. “In fact it implies that the United States is not trustworthy.”

Zarif described the letter as part of a “propaganda campaign” that began with an address last week by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to Congress, in which he challenged the still-developing deal as unwise and dangerous.

He also suggested that some members of Congress were not fully abreast of international law or their own Constitution when it comes to the authority of the president to conduct foreign policy.

“The authors may not fully understand that in international law, governments represent the entirety of their respective states, are responsible for the conduct of foreign affairs, are required to fulfill the obligations they undertake with other states and may not invoke their internal laws as justification for a failure to perform their international obligations,” Zarif was quoted as saying. “We insist that a possible deal should be one where our people’s rights are observed and we are certain that there are measures to achieve such a deal.”

Obama and Democrats in Congress have also denounced the letter, accusing Senate Republicans of trying to scupper the negotiations.

“It’s somewhat ironic to see some members of Congress wanting to make common cause with the hardliners in Iran,” Obama said. “It’s an unusual coalition.”

The letter was drafted by Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas and signed by 46 of his Republican colleagues.

The U.S. and five world powers have struggled since 2013 to negotiate a deal that would impose limits and oversight on Iran’s nuclear program in exchange for sanctions relief. Negotiators hope to reach a framework agreement this month and a final accord later this year.

Western nations have long suspected that Iran is trying to develop the ability to build a nuclear bomb, charges denied by Tehran, which insists its program is restricted to civilian uses such as power generation.

Photo: Secretary of State John Kerry meets with Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif in Geneva on January 14 for a bilateral meeting to provide guidance to their negotiating teams before their next round of discussions, which begin on January 15. (U.S. Mission/Eric Bridiers via Flickr)