News and Analysis (6/29/18)

The most bitter irony of U.S. withdrawal from JCPOA is that it is the U.S. not Iran that was in violation of the agreement to start with:

India claims that that they do not recognize unilateral restrictions imposed by the United States, and that their plans for drastic reduction of oil import from Iran are guided by UN sanctions …

… but Donald Trump cannot repeal the laws of supply and demand, and to whatever degree he may succeed in restricting Iranian exports he will drive up the price of oil …

… and if he succeeds in nullifying the agreement “[w]hat comes next likely will resemble Iran’s response to previous confrontation with the West over its contested atomic program:

“Palestinians reported 310 wounded by live fire and tear gas inhalation in clashes near the Israel-Gaza border, 133 of whom were taken to hospitals. Three of the casualties are said to be seriously wounded”:

“The idea that the issue at hand is a lack of confidence rather than a lack of freedom and respect on Israel’s part of basic Palestinian human rights, really does add insult to injury” …

… Palestinian territories (Guardian Opinion cartoon):

“The President’s statements, which the majority utterly fails to address in its legal analysis, strongly support the conclusion that the Proclamation was issued to express hostility toward Muslims and exclude them from the country” — Justice Sotomayor:

Despite U.S. Defense Secretary James Mattis’s continuing antagonism towards Iran, he remains opposed to military action:

Iran “should stop the decades-old government practice of subsidising the purchase of US dollars by Iranians travelling overseas. According to government policy, every Iranian who travels abroad is entitled to purchase a maximum of $1,000 at half the market price”:

Leave a Reply