Beyond the Cusp

June 16, 2016

Political War in Aftermath of Pulse Nightclub, Orlando


The horrors and the toll in human life and limb makes anyone come to definitive conclusions on how to insure that such horrors never again darken our morning news. Reading the reactions in the news and online and each individual was adamant in their solution not only being the obvious solution but also inarguably the only possible conclusion any rational person could reach. What’s the problem then BTC? The main problem is people had fallen into two camps as distinctive as the day is long and nobody remarkably suggested what we see as a third solution just as possible of solving the problem as the others. There was one camp in which we find President Obama and Candidate Hillary Clinton. They agree that the real problem is the private ownership of guns and that if nobody had access to firearms then such crimes would never happen. The other camp which we find candidate Donald Trump where they claim the problem is radicalized Muslims. The former camp would accuse the second camp of Islamophobia. The second camp called the first on being unrealistic and ignoring a little impediment called the Second Amendment. What both sides missed was an easier solution to the problem, make reporting such news illegal. I know, we would be ignoring Amendment I, but since rights and the code of laws did not constrain the other two groups, why not throw in an easier if not more legal approach. Of course there would be another consequence of a law allowing only positive news stories; it would destroy news reporting until somebody discovered the work-around.


News reports could always take a positive slant on negative news such as we can all celebrate we were not crossing the street when two cars collided flying out of control and destroying a mailbox, isn’t it just wonderful there were no pedestrians who found themselves in the location in question. OK, sure we need some polish, but with time there would be formulae which could be implemented for virtually any evil being reported with a positive slant and avoiding any mention of the negatives. They could even point out how it was a fortunate circumstance that somebody called and an ambulance responded to transport the people for necessary treatment once again proving the great healthcare provided in the country. Well, maybe we should just leave the media free and not challenge Amendment I. As for the other two finger pointing claiming that either Islamists or firearms are to blame? Perhaps we should take them each in turn.


The claim that firearms were the problem and that, if only people were not permitted to own firearms, and all guns were removed from the world, then shootings like the Pulse Nightclub in Orlando would become impossible. Of course there is no mention that the removal of all firearms from the world is impossible as long as nations insist on keeping their militaries armed with, you guessed it, firearms. Making matters even worse, militaries use real fully automatic fire weapons as well as explosives and rocket firing weapons which some are capable or taking out entire rooms and small buildings as well as armored vehicles and downing aircraft, all a whole lot more destructive than anything generally out in the public currently. As long as there are weapons anywhere, there will be weapons everywhere, just the more illegal they are made the more sinister the people who will deal in them and the far higher the prices of firearms for which they will be sold. Further, as long as only military weaponry will be manufactured, the firearms which do make their way into the hands of the most determined of criminals will have far more destructive capabilities and possibly by leagues is likely as only slightly. Further, a determined killer or a mentally unbalanced one would still be capable of committing a crime of similar or potentially more devastating result in a similar scenario. Since it appeared that escape was not easily available for the victims in the club, a person armed with a sword of the quality and ability of those used in warfare since time immemorial, the resulting slaughter may have been even greater and the injuries far more horrific and the victims still just as incapable of defending themselves. This would be even more true had the perpetrator in such scenario would have armed themselves with leather armor, studded and spiked, chain linked helm and other items making them just as dangerous as any attacker in a closed room (see below). The main difference is a firearm is a ranged weapon but one could arm themselves with ranged weapons with a small version equally deadly crossbow which fires four inch darts. There are no limits to how deadly and devious to weapons beyond that of imagination, and human imagination has proved to be virtually limitless or at least not bound by laws of man.


Sword Alternative to Firearms Real and Imagined

Sword Alternative to Firearms Real and Imagined


So restricting weaponry would be just as futile as it would impossible; so what about the other side, limiting those believed to have dangerous beliefs or practices? This too has been tried in the past when science was young and religion was king. Their attempts to limit science proved only temporary and ineffectual as well. Discoveries came and science spread almost as far and as fast as the imagination could perceive new ideas and experiments to prove or disprove each postulation. It mattered little whether it proved or disproved as long as it produced answers which would simply generate more questions. There was no locking the box which is the human mind and it eventually proves preposterous to even try. The King of Spain sent an Armada to bring Protestant England back under the control of Rome and approved Christianity. At that time there was only the Church of Rome and the Church of England and the second was the young upstart. So initially religion attempted in Europe to regulate religion within defined boundaries and failed. Some claim that the spread of Protestantism indirectly led to the scientific revolution which spawned from the Protestant Reformation to the Reawakening, the Renaissance, then followed political revolution, industrial revolution, and then the greatest invention of mankind, for the first time since the giving of the Law at Mount Sinai the world gave people time to themselves, the weekend and private time. Jewish Law, Torah had conceived of the necessity for human beings to have time where work was put aside for a day and the Sabbath was observed where people could pursue private endeavors and learn which originally meant the study of Torah. Even the time spent in study of Torah allowed for time with family and relaxation from the daily burdens of toil and labor which even applied to the servant and the slave, which were more like one’s employees. The salary was clothing, housing, food and protection from facing the world alone with nothing and if one worked for a successful person, they might even have a small salary on top of everything else; otherwise, one would need to request their employer if they desired something beyond the basics.


That piece of history should serve to prove that the desires of the mind and the soul cannot be strapped and tied down by laws, edicts or any oppressive acts from an establishment or even the counterculture. The mind, the individual, the soul if you will, cannot be prevented from going wherever it is destined by the chain of experiences, influences and, yes, often the temptations of the forbidden. If “radical Islam” as a belief system were to be regarded as something forbidden, that would simply serve to make it all the more enticing and often to the most vulnerable and Islamic State gives a perfect example of the result of attempting such a ban. That is the problem with Donald Trump’s idea to ban Muslims for a period from entering the United States as that would just make those who did find their way over the border placed with such difficulties that radicalization would be made far easier as the concept that they were being beaten down and forced into the shadows. The best path has been proven time and again throughout history though more often societies have gone from the best to the worst method of facing differences in cultures. The tried and proven method is limited accommodation with reward for incorporation of the existing societal model while allowing for variance as long as it remains within legal standards. Acceptance goes a long way towards modifying behavior towards cooperation rather than conflict. That is not to say that all behavior is to me accommodated as there are, by necessity, limitations to acceptable behavior. An example would be the Aztecs could be permitted to dress as they wish but their practice of cutting out the beating heart as part of an annual ceremony would need to be prevented from the start. Human sacrifice is not an acceptable form of worship and some other means would have to be found. The same would be for animal ritual sacrifice. Sacrifice of an animal for a celebratory feast would also need to be regulated in some manner such that the animal does not suffer. Simply placing the live animal in a cage and rotating it over the fire would be unacceptable as would many cruel means for killing the animal, but if an accepted and humane death be performed and then the animal roasted and consumed, it might be extreme to many but it is not that far removed from taking a side of beef and roasting it on a spit at a huge celebratory feast where the meat is to be consumed. Granted, the majority would prefer smaller servings but how many have been to an all you can eat buffet where roast beef is carves off the bone for those who desire roast beef over say meatloaf.


Donald Trump’s seeming well timed but probably ill-advised suggestion that all Middle East immigration be ceased for a period of six months, where it could be done, would prove ineffectual as anybody wishing to reach the United States from the Middle East need only reach Turkey with whom there exist laws allowing for their immigration to the United States and even if not Turkey, the news informs us how easily any Middle East refugee can reach most of Europe and from there the United States again would be legal and relatively easy. There is no way to prevent a determined person from reaching the shores of the United States legally and most definitely illegally. Donald Trump’s claim that by making this ban it would prevent any terrorists from the Middle East from reaching America is utterly false as the terrorists are exactly those who would have the funds to defeat any regulation one could enact as their “blanket fix” for the problem. The solution is a full background check and with records as lax as they are and the turmoil making most people all but without any identifiable or especially documented history and once again it is the terrorist who would most likely be capable of meeting even those requirements. There is no absolute means of preventing terrorists from gaining entry to any nation as has been proven by the recent attack in Tel Aviv, as Israel has likely the most effective screening and tracking for terrorist and terror likely individuals; but still there are attacks and in great numbers as it is impossible to prevent those attacks committed by what are termed “lone wolves” as they have no traceable history of interaction with terror institutions or even other terrorists.


The best way to protect and prevent such horrific criminal carnage comes down to a select few things. Have a society which commits to equality, extends egalitarianism in all things, and provides opportunity. Further the people themselves need be welcoming, accepting of various cultures for as long as they remain within societal codes, enjoys respect of every individual and remembers from where they came as it sets where they will proceed. The laws must be equally applied and respected by all members of the society. The last thing is to remember that every person is a gem to be enjoyed and allowed to shine with their own special brilliance and every day offers equal opportunity for all to achieve. Beyond that is the government’s responsibility in making all safe and respecting of the laws and rights of one another. None of this is easily accomplished and no society has provided such a high standard for more than half a millennium. Some very select groups have managed to maintain such expectations of standard of their peoples and their identity we will leave for each reader to research and discover the identities for themselves as they may be quite surprised and the greatest surprise is amongst the select groups.


Beyond the Cusp


November 29, 2013

Explaining Mixed Messages Out of Saudi Arabia on Iran Deal

Much has been made over the initial comments out of Riyadh, Saudi Arabia where officials stated hopes that the deal on Iran’s nuclear program could be a step towards a comprehensive solution and hoped it could lead to the removal of weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East. This statement was based upon the information that Secretary of State John Kerry had fed the Saudi Royals on his misdirection tour of Saudi Arabia and Israel on his way to Geneva in order to basically surrender and bow to virtually every whim of the Iranians. Secretary Kerry had given both the Saudis and the Israelis a complete litany of lies and fabrications telling them exactly what President Obama knew these presumed allies of the United States had stated they desired to be included as instrumental in any agreement with Iran. The crafting of the statement was designed more to include the statement concerning the removal of weapons of mass destruction from the Middle East, which is code for the denuclearization of Israel and destroying the Israeli nuclear weapons arsenal.


But later, Nawaf Obaid, an advisor, told a think tank meeting in London “we were lied to, things were hidden from us. The problem is not with the deal that was struck in Geneva but how it was done.” This was followed by statements from Saudi officials that they had been deceived by their American ally in the agreements and will pursue an independent foreign policy in response. The Saudi call for independent policy comes after an interview appeared last Friday in which Saudi Arabia’s UK ambassador, Prince Mohammed bin Nawaf bin Abdulaziz, stated that his country would not “sit idly by” should the Americans and the Western powers fail to stop Iran’s nuclear program. All of this comes at the same time as Russian President Putin has been talking with Saudi and Egyptian leaders arranging a sizeable weapons deal for Egypt and potentially signaling that these former allies of the United States may be seeking alternative relations as their trust and policy differences with the United States have led to straining the relationships. The full ramifications and fallout from the horrendous agreement between the P5+1 and the Iranians allowing the Iranians to continue to enrich Uranium, progress towards plutonium production by completing the heavy water plant at Arak and also continue in their research towards manufacturing ICBMs in a coordinated effort with North Korea continues to increase as more and more of the truth is revealed. The Iranians and North Koreans had the audacity to announce the further continuation in their cooperation on military matters within days of the finalizing of the deal over the Iranian nuclear program.


Other information which has been revealed recently has given even further signs damning the agreement for being even worse than many initially believed, which seemed impossible but still was managed somehow. Some of the revelations include that the agreement will not become enforced until the turn of the year. The Iranians even announced that the formal summation released by the White House misrepresented the actual agreement and that had the agreement actually contained the terms the White House released they would not have made the agreement. So, should one believe the Iranians or President Obama and the White House on what was included in the agreement that is the sixty-four thousand dollar question? Some decisions are difficult to decide and in this case we have the Iranians and the fact that they may have interpreted the agreement differently than did the Western parties as well as the possible truth that they might be simply using the concept of Taqiyyah which instructs Muslims to deceive in the service of furthering the interests of Islam or to believe a White House that has issued so many lies, and that was simply about Obamacare, that many now have doubts over anything coming out of Washington DC, likely a healthy idea. This entire fiasco over the deal with Iran, the falling out of the United States with longtime allies across the Middle East, Afghanistan President Hamid Karzai holding any agreement over continuing stationing of American military until after the elections basically placing his reelection as a condition to assure the ratification of the treaty, the continuing collapse of the situation in Iraq as the Sunnis respond against the persecution by the Shiite majority after the departure of the United States and allied forces, the disagreements with the current leadership of Egypt demanding that the Egyptian military provisional government return dethroned President Morsi and his Muslim Brotherhood to power against the will of a sizeable majority of the Egyptian people, the continued deterioration of the situation in Libya as this past month there have been open fighting in both the Capital of Tripoli and the city of Benghazi between government forces and tribal militias, the continuing civil war tearing Syria apart and threatening to spill over the border into Lebanon and the continued pressuring by the Obama Administration on Israel while supporting the Palestinians on virtually all fronts has some, even in the liberal press, reporting on the difficulties and his seeming inability to address any of these problems. This is simply a partial list of President Obama’s difficulties in the Middle East and does not include the disastrous rollout of Obamacare with the website and everything else that includes and a litany of other problems reflected in his diving approval numbers, but that is for another time.


Beyond the Cusp


November 26, 2013

Iran Deal Additional Thoughts and Complete Text

You can almost always tell when something is truly a horrendous decision, deal, piece of legislation or virtually anything imaginable by the fact that those who openly oppose or denounce the item come from many and varied source and places. The deal made between the P5+1 and Iran largely at the insistence and through the efforts of United States President Obama and the Iranian leadership has been denounced or condemned by Saudi Arabia’s Royal Family and the Israeli Prime Minister and numerous others both from the Knesset and those holding Ministerial Positions including those in the Prime Minister’s Security Council which are two nations who previously have been at odds and there is no love lost between them; Republican House Majority Leader Eric Cantor of Virginia and Democrat Senator Bernie Sanders who are a pair who normally align at near opposite ends of the political spectrum in the United States; and there likely exist numerous other pairings that would further evidence the complete disaster this agreement is. What is even more damning is the manner by which President Obama reached this deal with the Iranians. President Obama assigned the responsibility for setting the agenda and reaching an agreement with the Iranians through secretive meetings which were conducted away from the vision and without the knowledge of the other members of the P5+1, or at least behind the backs of the French and British who were completely blindsided when the details of that agreement became known last week, to Valerie Jarrett. Ms. Jarrett was Iranian born and has suggested that the United States use the United States Military to force the Israeli government release all of the disputed lands for the formation of a Palestinian state and continue to occupy Israel to assure that they take no steps against the Palestinians and prevent the Israelis from actively fighting terrorism. Her record illuminates her preference for the Muslim side of most areas of contention especially against Jews. Of all the members of the Administration, Valerie Jarrett is probably the last person I can think of to give the responsibility for making an agreement with the Iranians considering her background. One can only guess how horrendous the agreement which initially resulted from her deliberations and was presented last week such that the British and the French considered it necessary to call the leaderships of Israel and Saudi Arabia and inform them of the betrayal which President Obama and Valerie Jarrett were attempting to commit on these former allies, or at least very strained and distressed allies and then to have the French take the unprecedented step of vetoing an agreement presented by the President of the United States, the leader of what is likely one of the most steadfast allies of the French through both the good and bad times.


Sanctions are to be relaxed or ended in exchange for Iranian promises, what many fear are really empty promises not offered with earnest intent or content, to allow IAEA monitoring of their nuclear program, a guarantee they have made and broken every single time they have made said assurance either by outright expulsion of the IAEA inspectors or simply causing delays preventing timely surprise inspections providing Iranian personnel to clean or otherwise make sites presentable and ready for such inspections thus denying effective over-watch ability. The sanctioning bodies and nations, which include the European Union, United Nations and numerous individual countries including but not limited to all of the P5+1 members and Canada, are to relax sanctions including pausing efforts to further reduce Iran’s crude oil sales, enabling Iran’s current customers to purchase their current average amounts of crude oil. Enable the repatriation of an agreed amount of revenue held abroad rumored to total at least four billion dollars. For such oil sales, suspend the European Union and United States sanctions on associated insurance and transportation services. The United States and European Union would further suspend sanctions on Iran’s petrochemical exports, as well as sanctions on associated services, gold and precious metals, as well as sanctions on associated services, United States sanctions on Iran’s auto industry, as well as sanctions on associated services. Furthermore, there will be provided services which were nonexistent before the sanctions were originally enacted thus now allowing for the license, supply and installation in Iran of spare parts for safety of flight for Iranian civil aviation and associated services and the license safety related inspections and repairs in Iran as well as associated services. This entire list of goodies provided because the Iranians elected a new hardline President named Rouhani who was formerly the Iranian nuclear lead negotiator who stalled and glad-handed the West proving to be a master of the smiling and jovial snake in the grass but is supposedly a newly transformed new man to be trusted. Why am I so reminded of an old phrase about tigers and something about their stripes being of a permanent nature? The Obama Administration’s argument is that this was the best deal possible and that there was no other route that might prevent Iran from nuclear weapons short of a war. This is exactly the same argument used by President Jimmy Carter when his only attempt to rescue the hostages failed and he was faced with a hostile and determined Iran. The falsehood of President Carter’s argument was exposed when Iran released the hostages merely at the proposition that newly elected President Ronald Reagan would raise the price the Iranians would have to pay for holding Americans hostage. The simple idea that a new, no-nonsense approach was in the offerings was sufficient to push the Iranians to capitulate and a similar approach and threat would have again forced the Iranians to change their behavior and likely ended their drive for nuclear weapons, period. That was the alternative not tried and denied of existing by the entirety of the Obama Administration and the big lie at the center of the entire demand that surrender is the only option.


Perhaps I have become suspicious and prone to taking a negative first look at almost anything done by governments the vast majority of the time. Perhaps I should take the time to report a positive step which I find in the news at least once in a while. The problem with such is that I will most likely find things as positive will anger many others but then I already appear to have such an effect with the things I dislike. The one piece of news which was at least intriguing and should prove quite interesting to watch the ramifications going forward was the African nation of Angola has reportedly become the first country to ban Islam. Not only have they banned Islam but the ban includes orders to demolish mosques in the country. The United States State Department lists Angola’s population as 16 million as being predominantly Christian, with only 80,000-90,000 Muslims, the majority of whom are migrants from West Africa and families of Lebanese origin. Angolan President Jose Eduardo dos Santos said Sunday “this is the final end of Islamic influence in our country.” Angolan Minister of Culture, Rosa Cruz e Silva said “the process of legalization of Islam has not been approved by the Ministry of Justice and Human rights, their mosques would be closed until further notice.” Silva further claimed the ban was necessary since Islam is “contradictory to the customs of Angola culture.” Silva also commented on other non-legalized religions on the list “published by the Ministry of Justice and Human Rights in the Angolan newspaper ‘Jornal de Angola’ are prohibited to conduct worship, so they should keep their doors closed.” On a more tolerant and open side, the Minister of Culture added that there is a legalization process through which over a thousand religious sects are currently applying. This should prove to be a turning point, just what will be turned up by this is left to the future to elucidate as I have no idea how this will play out in the near future or over the long term either. I guess we will have to watch and take note for future reference and see if others also follow Angola with this radical and unprecedented move, at least unprecedented in recent history outside of places like Saudi Arabia where Islam is the sole permitted religion and being Jewish or in possession of any holy book other than the Koran and the Hadiths can be punishable by death and where the ruling Royals actually requested that the United States at least not allow any Jewish soldiers to be included in the forces sent to combat against Saddam Hussein and both prevent him from moving on Saudi Arabia and evict his forces out of Kuwait in Gulf War I. Maybe Angola is not so unprecedented as I first thought, appears Saudi Arabia beat them at this ban religions practice and to a far greater extent.


Beyond the Cusp


Complete Text of the P5+1 Deal with Iran Concerning Their Nuclear Program

Geneva, 24 November 2013

Joint Plan of Action


The goal for these negotiations is to reach a mutually-agreed long-term comprehensive solution that would ensure Iran’s nuclear program will be exclusively peaceful. Iran reaffirms that under no circumstances will Iran ever seek or develop any nuclear weapons. This comprehensive solution would build on these initial measures and result in a final step for a period to be agreed upon and the resolution of concerns. This comprehensive solution would enable Iran to fully enjoy its right to nuclear energy for peaceful purposes under the relevant articles of the NPT in conformity with its obligations therein. This comprehensive solution would involve a mutually defined enrichment program with practical limits and transparency measures to ensure the peaceful nature of the program. This comprehensive solution would constitute an integrated whole where nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. This comprehensive solution would involve a reciprocal, step-by-step process, and would produce the comprehensive lifting of all UN Security Council sanctions, as well as multilateral and national sanctions related to Iran’s nuclear program.

There would be additional steps in between the initial measures and the final step, including, among other things, addressing the UN Security Council resolutions, with a view toward bringing to a satisfactory conclusion the UN Security Council’s consideration of this matter. The E3+3 and Iran will be responsible for conclusion and implementation of mutual near-term measures and the comprehensive solution in good faith. A Joint Commission of E3/EU+3 and Iran will be established to monitor the implementation of the near-term measures and address issues that may arise, with the IAEA responsible for verification of nuclear-related measures. The Joint Commission will work with the IAEA to facilitate resolution of past and present issues of concern.


Elements of a first step:

The first step would be time-bound, with a duration of 6 months, and renewable by mutual consent, during which all parties will work to maintain a constructive atmosphere for negotiations in good faith.

Iran would undertake the following voluntary measures:

From the existing uranium enriched to 20%, retain half as working stock of 20% oxide for fabrication of fuel for the TRR. Dilute the remaining 20% UF6 to no more than 5%. No reconversion line.

Iran announces that it will not enrich uranium over 5% for the duration of the 6 months.

Iran announces that it will not make any further advances of its activities at the Natanz Fuel Enrichment Plant1, Fordow2, or the Arak reactor3, designated by the IAEA as IR-40.

Beginning when the line for conversion of UF6 enriched up to 5% to UO2 is ready, Iran has decided to convert to oxide UF6 newly enriched up to 5% during the 6 month period, as provided in the operational schedule of the conversion plant declared to the IAEA.

No new locations for the enrichment.

Iran will continue its safeguarded R&D practices, including its current enrichment R&D practices, which are not designed for accumulation of the enriched uranium.

No reprocessing or construction of a facility capable of reprocessing.


Enhanced monitoring:


Provision of specified information to the IAEA, including information on Iran’s plans for nuclear facilities, a description of each building on each nuclear site, a description of the scale of operations for each location engaged in specified nuclear activities, information on uranium mines and mills, and information on source material. This information would be provided within three months of the adoption of these measures.

Submission of an updated DIQ for the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40, to the IAEA.

Steps to agree with the IAEA on conclusion of the Safeguards Approach for the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40.

Daily IAEA inspector access when inspectors are not present for the purpose of Design Information Verification, Interim Inventory Verification, Physical Inventory Verification, and unannounced inspections, for the purpose of access to offline surveillance records, at Fordow and Natanz.


IAEA inspector managed access to:

– centrifuge assembly workshops4;

– centrifuge rotor production workshops and storage facilities; and,

– Uranium mines and mills.


In return, the E3/EU+3 would undertake the following voluntary measures:

Pause efforts to further reduce Iran’s crude oil sales, enabling Iran’s current customers to purchase their current average amounts of crude oil. Enable the repatriation of an agreed amount of revenue held abroad. For such oil sales, suspend the EU and U.S. sanctions on associated insurance and transportation services.


Suspend U.S. and EU sanctions on:

Iran’s petrochemical exports, as well as sanctions on associated services.5

Gold and precious metals, as well as sanctions on associated services.

Suspend U.S. sanctions on Iran’s auto industry, as well as sanctions on associated services.

License the supply and installation in Iran of spare parts for safety of flight for Iranian civil aviation and associated services. License safety related inspections and repairs in Iran as well as associated services.6

No new nuclear-related UN Security Council sanctions.

No new EU nuclear-related sanctions.

The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the respective roles of the President and the Congress, will refrain from imposing new nuclear-related sanctions.

Establish a financial channel to facilitate humanitarian trade for Iran’s domestic needs using Iranian oil revenues held abroad. Humanitarian trade would be defined as transactions involving food and agricultural products, medicine, medical devices, and medical expenses incurred abroad. This channel would involve specified foreign banks and non-designated Iranian banks to be defined when establishing the channel.


This channel could also enable:

transactions required to pay Iran’s UN obligations; and,

direct tuition payments to universities and colleges for Iranian students studying abroad, up to an agreed amount for the six month period.

Increase the EU authorization thresholds for transactions for non-sanctioned trade to an agreed amount.


Elements of the final step of a comprehensive solution*

 The final step of a comprehensive solution, which the parties aim to conclude negotiating and commence implementing no more than one year after the adoption of this document, would:

Have a specified long-term duration to be agreed upon.

Reflect the rights and obligations of parties to the NPT and IAEA Safeguards Agreements.

Comprehensively lift UN Security Council, multilateral and national nuclear-related sanctions, including steps on access in areas of trade, technology, finance, and energy, on a schedule to be agreed upon.

Involve a mutually defined enrichment program with mutually agreed parameters consistent with practical needs, with agreed limits on scope and level of enrichment activities, capacity, where it is carried out, and stocks of enriched uranium, for a period to be agreed upon.

Fully resolve concerns related to the reactor at Arak, designated by the IAEA as the IR-40. No reprocessing or construction of a facility capable of reprocessing.

Fully implement the agreed transparency measures and enhanced monitoring. Ratify and implement the Additional Protocol, consistent with the respective roles of the President and the Majlis (Iranian parliament).

Include international civil nuclear cooperation, including among others, on acquiring modern light water power and research reactors and associated equipment, and the supply of modern nuclear fuel as well as agreed R&D practices.

Following successful implementation of the final step of the comprehensive solution for its full duration, the Iranian nuclear program will be treated in the same manner as that of any non-nuclear weapon state party to the NPT.

* With respect to the final step and any steps in between, the standard principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” applies.



Namely, during the 6 months, Iran will not feed UF6 into the centrifuges installed but not enriching uranium. Not install additional centrifuges. Iran announces that during the first 6 months, it will replace existing centrifuges with centrifuges of the same type.

At Fordow, no further enrichment over 5% at 4 cascades now enriching uranium, and not increase enrichment capacity. Not feed UF6 into the other 12 cascades, which would remain in a non-operative state. No interconnections between cascades. Iran announces that during the first 6 months, it will replace existing centrifuges with centrifuges of the same type.

Iran announces on concerns related to the construction of the reactor at Arak that for 6 months it will not commission the reactor or transfer fuel or heavy water to the reactor site and will not test additional fuel or produce more fuel for the reactor or install remaining components.

Consistent with its plans, Iran’s centrifuge production during the 6 months will be dedicated to replace damaged machines. “Sanctions on associated services” means any service, such as insurance, transportation, or financial, subject to the underlying U.S. or EU sanctions applicable, insofar as each service is related to the underlying sanction and required to facilitate the desired transactions. These services could involve any non-designated Iranian entities.

Sanctions relief could involve any non-designated Iranian airlines as well as Iran Air.


Next Page »

Blog at

%d bloggers like this: