Iran to 'breach' enriched uranium limit within 20 days Watch

Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#1
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#1
I find it rather droll that the US has the impudence to accuse Iran of blackmail in this instance. Trump claims to be a business man, he should know when you scrap a deal there is no reason for the other party to abide by it either...


Iran has announced it will breach on 27 June the limit on its stockpile of enriched uranium that was set under a 2015 nuclear deal with world powers.
Its atomic energy agency said it had quadrupled production of the material, which is used to make reactor fuel and potentially nuclear weapons.
But it added there was "still time" for European countries to act by protecting Iran from reinstated US sanctions.
The US, which pulled out of the deal, accused Iran of "nuclear extortion".
"This is a pattern of 40 years of behaviour, it's consistent with how the Iranian regime behaves," US state department spokeswoman Morgan Ortagus said.
"We would say to the international community that we should not yield to nuclear extortion by the Iranian regime."
The UK, France and Germany have warned Iran not to violate the 2015 deal.
They have previously said they will have no choice but to reimpose their own sanctions, which were lifted in return for limits on the Iranian nuclear programme.

In a separate development, Iran said it had broken up a cyber spying network run by the CIA. It said several US spies had been arrested in different countries.
The US did not immediately comment on the allegation.
The latest developments come at a time of high tension in the Middle East, with the US accusing Iran of being behind suspected attacks that left two oil tankers ablaze in the Gulf of Oman on Thursday. Iran has denied any involvement.
How significant is this announcement?


Context in international affairs is everything.
In early May, Iran signalled its intention to break out from some of the constraints imposed by the nuclear deal. On Monday, it repeated that threat, adding that the rate of enrichment was being stepped up and that it expected to break the limit on the amount of low-enriched uranium it can hold before the end of this month.
But since its first announcement, the context has changed dramatically with two sets of attacks on oil tankers in the Gulf - both attributed by the US to Iran.
Many fear that Washington and Tehran are on the verge of a military clash and that miscalculation could tip them over the edge.
Iran's further threat today to increase its level of enrichment to a stage that would bring it much closer to "weapons-grade" material adds another element of risk into an already combustible mix.

In early May, the US stepped up pressure on Iran by ending exemptions from secondary sanctions for countries still buying Iranian oil. The move was intended to deny the Iranian government its principal source of revenue.
Iranian President Hassan Rouhani subsequently announced that his country was scaling back its commitments under the nuclear deal.

This included no longer complying with caps on its stockpiles of low-enriched uranium and heavy water - set at 300kg (660lb) and 130 tonnes respectively - and halting sales of surplus supplies overseas.
Mr Rouhani also gave the European powers 60 days to protect Iranian oil sales. If they failed, he said, Iran would suspend its restrictions on uranium enrichment and halt the redesign of its heavy-water reactor at Arak, whose spent fuel would contain plutonium suitable for a bomb.
On Monday, a spokesman for the Atomic Energy Organisation of Iran told a televised news conference at Arak that the "countdown to pass the 300kg reserve of enriched uranium has started".
"In 10 days' time... we will pass this limit," Behrouz Kamalvandi said.
"There is still time for the Europeans... But the Europeans have expressed indirectly their inability to act. They should not think that after 60 days, they will have another 60-day opportunity."
Image copyrightAFPImage captionIran has a heavy water reactor and heavy water plant at Arak
The Europeans have set up a "special purpose vehicle" that would essentially allow goods to be bartered between Iranian and foreign companies without direct financial transactions. But the mechanism - known as Instex - is not yet operational.
Mr Kamalvandi also said Iran might start enriching uranium up to 5% concentration so that it could provide fuel for its Bushehr power plant, or even up to the 20% concentration required for the Tehran research reactor.
Experts say the technical leap required to get to 90% concentration from 20% is relatively straightforward, because it becomes easier at higher levels. Going from the natural state of 0.7% concentration to 20% takes 90% of the total energy required.
Iran maintains that its nuclear programme is for peaceful purposes.






What other reaction has there been?

A spokesman for UK Prime Minister Theresa May said her government had been "clear about our concern at Iranian plans to reduce compliance" with the deal.
"Should Iran cease meeting its nuclear commitments, we would then look at all options available to us," the spokesman added.
The German foreign ministry urged Iran to abide by the deal.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who was a staunch opponent of the nuclear deal, called for international sanctions to be reimposed immediately "should Iran deliver on its current threats".
"In any event, Israel will not allow Iran to get nuclear weaponry," he warned.

https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-48661843
1
reply
schoolsboring
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#2
Report 4 weeks ago
#2
If Iran thinks that going against the UK, Germany, France and Russia is a good idea when they already have bad connections with the US, they are doomed.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#3
Report 4 weeks ago
#3
The issue is that Iran was supposed to sell excess enriched uranium and heavy water on the international market, but the US sanctioned this! So this was inevitable as a result anyway.

This is a weak measure but a good start. In 20 days time - once the feckless Europeans inevitably fail to meet the very reasonable 60 day deadline given by Iran for Europe to start fulfilling its commitments under the JCPOA - hopefully Iran will start enriching uranium up to 20% again.

Unfortunately, Iran needs probably 5 more years before it perfects its IR-6/8 centrifuges for a latent nuclear capability, so the JCPOA was a great way to buy that time. IR-2M will do the job until then though, hopefully we will see thousands of these installed in the next stage of Iranian countermeasures to US/EU violations of the JCPOA.

Iranian officials have also promised a "strategic leap" in military capability if the Europeans don't get their act together, hopefully this will be to test a longer range BM (the self-imposed 2000km range limit is purely artificial because the Khorramshahr MRBM is already capable of 4000km range, they just put a massive 1.5 tonne warhead on it to artificially reduce its range to 2000km).
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#4
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#4
(Original post by schoolsboring)
If Iran thinks that going against the UK, Germany, France and Russia is a good idea when they already have bad connections with the US, they are doomed.
I rather doubt its particularly scared of the aforementioned. Russia and Iran have cordial relations, the Iranaians hate the British anyway and Germany/France want nothing to do with any potential war.
Not to mention those countries arent really helping Iran yet.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#5
Report 4 weeks ago
#5
This shows that the 'deal' is to bribe Iran not to enrich uranium and that they can resort to it at anytime, it's not as if there isn't room for discussion on how much of a deal that really is. To the EU, the deal is more of an economic concern and for Israel, SA and the US it is much more strategic than that.
0
reply
schoolsboring
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#6
Report 4 weeks ago
#6
(Original post by Napp)
I rather doubt its particularly scared of the aforementioned. Russia and Iran have cordial relations, the Iranaians hate the British anyway and Germany/France want nothing to do with any potential war.
Not to mention those countries arent really helping Iran yet.
But countries like UK France especially hold power in the UN security council and have worldwide influence, if I was trying not to make enemies they would be in the top 5.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#7
Report 4 weeks ago
#7
(Original post by z-hog)
This shows that the 'deal' is to bribe Iran not to enrich uranium and that they can resort to it at anytime, it's not as if there isn't room for discussion on how much of a deal that really is. To the EU, the deal is more of an economic concern and for Israel, SA and the US it is much more strategic than that.
Iran has mastered the nuclear fuel cycle already, you can't "unlearn" this knowledge. Besides, Iran has a legal right to enrich uranium under Article 4 of the NPT to which Iran is a signatory (unlike Israel).

Iran was already enriching uranium, you omit the key fact that Iran only announced these legitimate additional steps because the US violated the deal in the first place.


I don't expect any better than this type of uninformed drivel from you, but I'm just correcting you so everyone else knows you're utterly clueless on this issue.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#8
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#8
(Original post by z-hog)
This shows that the 'deal' is to bribe Iran not to enrich uranium and that they can resort to it at anytime,
Well duh. that was literally the point of it. The bigger point though is that Iran was the only one to abide by the deal whilst America showed the world it is perfidious.
[quote[
it's not as if there isn't room for discussion on how much of a deal that really is.[/quote]
Pardon?
To the EU, the deal is more of an economic concern and for Israel, SA and the US it is much more strategic than that.
Seeing as Europe is now within range of Iranian missiles (if they were so inclined) and the Iranians have the capability to unleash a tidalwave of migrants west its pretty strategic for them too.
As for America and the US, their only objection is that it might one day mean they cant crap all over the neighbourhood unchallenged. Im not sure what South Africa has to do with this though?
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#9
Report 4 weeks ago
#9
(Original post by schoolsboring)
If Iran thinks that going against the UK, Germany, France and Russia is a good idea when they already have bad connections with the US, they are doomed.
This has nothing to do with "going against" anyone, it's purely related to Iran upholding its legitimate interests and legal right to enrich uranium.

Iran voluntarily agreed to temporary compromises on its purely civilian nuclear programme as an act of good faith. The US then violated the JCPOA and reimposed sanctions. The EU have a duty under the JCPOA to ensure Iran enjoys certain economic benefits in exchange for their voluntary compromises, the EU has failed to meet its obligations in this area. Thus, Iran is well within its rights to gradually cease performing some of its obligations under the JCPOA, unless you think that Iran should maintain fulfilling all its JCPOA-obligations unilaterally!
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#10
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#10
(Original post by schoolsboring)
But countries like UK France especially hold power in the UN security council and have worldwide influence, if I was trying not to make enemies they would be in the top 5.
Not in Iran they don't, at least not thanks to American sanctions.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#11
Report 4 weeks ago
#11
(Original post by schoolsboring)
But countries like UK France especially hold power in the UN security council and have worldwide influence, if I was trying not to make enemies they would be in the top 5.
What are the Europeans going to do, comply with US sanctions?

They already are (in breach of their obligations under the JCPOA).

Iran has nothing to lose here, the spineless Europeans have zero leverage over Iran and if they had any balls or braincells they'd get their **** together and start taking their own self-declared foreign policy objectives seriously and start fulfilling their JCPOA-obligations.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#12
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#12
(Original post by Palmyra)
What are the Europeans going to do, comply with US sanctions?

They already are (in breach of their obligations under the JCPOA).

Iran has nothing to lose here, the spineless Europeans have zero leverage over Iran and if they had any balls or braincells they'd get their **** together and start taking their own self-declared foreign policy objectives seriously.
It beggars belief people can try and blame Tehran for this when we literally watched the fatuous sack of *** Trump rip up an international agreement the Iranians were abiding by in good faith.
0
reply
schoolsboring
Badges: 11
Rep:
?
#13
Report 4 weeks ago
#13
(Original post by Napp)
Not in Iran they don't, at least not thanks to American sanctions.
They still possess things in the UN like veto power which basically means they can stop any resolution being passed. Which could be disastrous for Iran
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#14
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#14
(Original post by schoolsboring)
They still possess things in the UN like veto power which basically means they can stop any resolution being passed. Which could be disastrous for Iran
I think you'll find that's what the Russians and Chinese have traditionally been there for.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#15
Report 4 weeks ago
#15
(Original post by schoolsboring)
They still possess things in the UN like veto power which basically means they can stop any resolution being passed. Which could be disastrous for Iran
WRONG: sanctions already apply on Iran. They're currently unilateral US extraterritorial sanctions, but virtually everyone is complying with them, so there is in effect no difference (vs multilateral UNSC sanctions).

Also, China is staunchly opposed to the US' extraterritorial sanctions and is currently embroiled in a bitter trade war with the US, thus China would likely veto any resolution at the UNSC against Iran. Hence why the US has not tried to go down this route.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#16
Report 4 weeks ago
#16
(Original post by Napp)
I'm not sure what South Africa has to do with this though?
Nothing much, it means Saudi Arabia and it's my fault for not putting a K in it. If you've never heard of Stuxnet, look it up one day because it's worth the time.
0
reply
Napp
Badges: 22
Rep:
?
#17
Report Thread starter 4 weeks ago
#17
(Original post by z-hog)
Nothing much, it means Saudi Arabia and it's my fault for not putting a K in it. If you've never heard of Stuxnet, look it up one day because it's worth the time.
Oh right fair enough.
Strangely enough i am familiar with cyber weapons. I'm also familiar with the trouble of using them in that they can come back and boot you in the ass, present a massive escalatorry risk and are generally uncontrollable.
0
reply
z-hog
Badges: 10
Rep:
?
#18
Report 4 weeks ago
#18
(Original post by Palmyra)
I don't expect any better than this type of uninformed drivel from you, but I'm just correcting you so everyone else knows you're utterly clueless on this issue.
You're far too partial to talk to, anything that doesn't match your nationalistic fervour is immediately discounted as an attack even when it is just an overview of the whole thing. I didn't actually say anything critical of Iran and you're not debasing anything but it's like a rag to a bull so go talk to someone else.
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#19
Report 4 weeks ago
#19
(Original post by z-hog)
Nothing much, it means Saudi Arabia and it's my fault for not putting a K in it. If you've never heard of Stuxnet, look it up one day because it's worth the time.
2010 report from 'the good ISIS' on the impact of the Stuxnet attacks:

Although Stuxnet appears to be designed to destroy centrifuges at the Natanz facility, destruction was by no means total. Moreover, Stuxnet did not lower the production of LEU during 2010.

... there remain important questions about why Stuxnet destroyed only 1,000 centrifuges. One observation is that it may be harder to destroy centrifuges by use of cyber attacks than often believed.
http://isis-online.org/uploads/isis-..._15Feb2011.pdf

In sum: the attacks underperformed, only destroyed 1000 IR-1 centrifuges. Just two years later Iran had doubled its total number of centrifuges (to 20,000).

Since then Iran has developed a national cybersecurity agency and invested heavily in protecting key assets from such attacks. In addition, Iran is now one of the most potent offensive cyber-attackers in the world. Be careful what you wish for.
Last edited by Palmyra; 4 weeks ago
0
reply
Palmyra
Badges: 20
#20
Report 4 weeks ago
#20
(Original post by z-hog)
You're far too partial to talk to, anything that doesn't match your nationalistic fervour is immediately discounted as an attack even when it is just an overview of the whole thing. I didn't actually say anything critical of Iran and you're not debasing anything but it's like a rag to a bull so go talk to someone else.
This is not about nationalism, this is about facts and you spreading myths and falsehoods such as "the 'deal' is to bribe Iran not to enrich uranium and that they can resort to it at anytime". Naturally, I had to debunk such lies. Don't take it personal.
0
reply
X

Quick Reply

Attached files
Write a reply...
Reply
new posts
Latest
My Feed

See more of what you like on
The Student Room

You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

Personalise

Are you tempted to change your firm university choice on A-level results day?

Yes, I'll try and go to a uni higher up the league tables (155)
17.61%
Yes, there is a uni that I prefer and I'll fit in better (76)
8.64%
No I am happy with my course choice (522)
59.32%
I'm using Clearing when I have my exam results (127)
14.43%

Watched Threads

View All