Monday, March 30, 2015

Falsely Accusing Iran of "Backing Away" from Nuclear Deal--New York Times

David Sanger and Michael Gordon of the New York Times have done it again. They have managed to accuse Iran of acting in bad faith on the nuclear negotiations--without even knowing what those negotiations consist of, or before an agreement is either signed or abandoned.

("Iran Backs Away from Key Detail in Nuclear Deal," New York Times March 29, 2015)

Messers Sanger and Gordon have been trying to sabotage these talks with their insidious journalism since they began. Sanger in particular was furious at the NIE assessments that asserted clearly that Iran had no nuclear weapons program. By using known Iran detractors such as Gary Samore, Olli Harnonen and David Albright almost exclusively in their reporting, and by editorializing on IAEA reports, they have done their work well. Many Americans firmly believe that Iran is on a path to making nuclear weapons, even though no evidence for this exists at all, anywhere.

In this case they claim that Iran has "backed away" from shipping enriched uranium to Russia based on a single remark to the Iranian press by Iranian deputy foreign minister, Abbas Araqchi that “The export of stocks of enriched uranium is not in our program, and we do not intend sending them abroad,”

The possibility of sending the enriched uranium abroad may or may not have been on the table in the nuclear negotiations, but it was so widely rumored, that in the eyes of Messrs Sanger and Gordon it was some kind of bedrock principle of the talks.

Iran cannot be accused of backing awy from something it has never agreed to do.

Anyone watching Iran should realize that dealings between Iran and Russia are not a matter of trust and good will. Iran deeply distrusts deals that make its supply of uranium dependent on Russia. This has happened several times before. They are afraid that they will ship their uranium to Russia and it will disappear forever, either not given back by Russia, or subject to sequestration by the International Community. Given their experience with the sanctions, this is a fairly reasonable supposition.

There are alternatives to shipping the uranium out of the country, and we will see if those prevail. I hope they do. The Russian delegate clearly was upset. He left the talks. But he was never assured of the uranium transfer.

It is hoped that cooler heads prevail in Lausanne and that an agreement can still be reached.


Anonymous said...

So Samore, Harnonen(sic) and Albright are not experts in this field?
You are wrong about that.
The NYT has consistently supported the idea of an agreement with Iran. Roger Cohen writing in today"s paper continues this policy.
You've returned to this site to offer more thoughts. Perhaps will take claim for some of your wilder prophesies about the regime in Iraq and the Iranian-Saudian rapport.
I too hope that cool heads will prevail in Lausanne but this means I desire a different outcome than you do.

William Beeman said...

I didn't say that Samore, Albright and Hainonen weren't experts. I said they were Iran detractors. They know enough to distort the nuclear information on Iran through omission and through invidious interpretation and exaggeration. They are "reliable sources" for the extremely hostile Messrs Sanger, Broad and Gordon who apparently desire the outcome you do, and are quite willing to distort the news to get to that result. However I think they are going to fail.

Anonymous said...

You should lay a foundation for your rant, providing specific examples and motivation for these so-called distortions. Otherwise your remarks reflect merely petulance.

Greg Bacon said...

Looks like your excellent blog has gotten the attention of the JIDF and other hasbara outlets.

I'm old enough to remember back to before Israel was spawned illegally by a UN that had no statutory right to carve a new nation out of an existing one.
Back then, the USA had NO enemies in the ME, now they seem to be everywhere and [not] coincidentally, they're the nations Israel wants destroyed.

Andrew Foren said...

I like to see their website For all countries it is important to maintain the Relationship between Kingdom of Saudi Arabia and USA in best of ways, something that helps in increasing trade as well as growing business in fruitful new ways. There are professional agencies as well as groups coming up who are playing its role and Migrate to USA from Saudi helping business to its role and Migrate to USA from Saudi helping business to grow.