Dr. Ismael Hossein-zadeh is an Iranian-born Professor Emeritus of Economics at Drake University. Holding a PhD in Economics from New School for Social Research, Professor Hossein-zadeh taught economics at Drake University (Des Moines, Iowa) from the fall of 1988 until the spring of 2011. Before that he also taught in a number of economic departments in New York metropolitan area, including Lehman College, Manhattan College, Long Island University (the Brooklyn Campus), La Guardia Community College, and St. Petersburg College (Jersey City, New Jersey). He has been widely published on economic crises and restructuring policies, NAFTA and labor, Third World debt, determinants of presidential economic policies, the political economy of war, etc.
He is the author of Beyond Mainstream Explanations of the Financial Crisis (Routledge 2014), The Political Economy of U.S. Militarism (Palgrave–Macmillan 2007), and the Soviet Non-capitalist Development: The Case of Nasser’s Egypt (Praeger Publishers 1989). He is also a contributor to Hopeless: Barack Obama and the Politics of Illusion. In an exclusive interview with Khamenei.ir, Professor Hossein-zadeh sheds light on the US breaching of the JCPOA and the Congress's recent renewal of sanctions:
The U.S. Congress brought up the issue of renewing sanctions; they claim this is not a new set of sanctions, but a 'renewal of them'. How is this move an example of breaching the JCPOA?
Under point 26 of JCPOA, “The U.S. Administration, acting consistent with the respective roles of the President and the Congress, will refrain from imposing new nuclear-related sanctions.”
Yet, Sections of the renewed/extended 10-year sanctions, or Iran Sanctions Act (ISA), are specifically nuclear related. These include sections 4.3.2 and 4.3.4, which are related to petroleum and its products:
“4.3.2. Sanctions on investment, including participation in joint ventures, goods, services, information, technology and technical expertise and support for Iran's oil, gas, and petrochemical sectors (ISA Sections 5(a) (1)-(2).”
“4.3.4. Sanctions on the export, sale or provision of refined petroleum products and petrochemical products to Iran (ISA Section 5(a) (3).”
It is obvious, then, that extended ISA does breach JCPOA.
The Obama administration, which was the signatory of the nuclear agreement, has already acted against its JCPOA commitments. What can we expect from the new resident of the Oval office in this regard?
President-elect Trump will most likely go along with both JCPOA and the extended ISA. The reason is that, using JCPOA, the U.S. has achieved all its nuclear-related goals in Iran without given much in return. And the Trump administration would not be stupid to act against such a deal—Trump’s electioneering ranting against the deal notwithstanding.
The US has issued a license to France's Airbus for the sell of 106 planes to Iran, just months after the signing of the JCPOA. Why is it that other nations need to count on US approval in order to work with Iran?
Because other nations and their business entities (for example, Airbus) are afraid of severe U.S. penalties and/or sanctions. In this sense the U.S. acts as the metaphorical world godfather, bullying other countries into submission. Trade and investment between the U.S. and France, for example, are so critically important to the French economy that it cannot afford to antagonize the U.S.
In the email leaks known as “Podesta Emails” Clinton's policy advisors were urged to take tough measures against Iran. Part of an email to Jake Sullivan reads: “If the US itself believes Iran has cheated, as President, she [Hillary Clinton] would re-impose US sanctions, even if Russia-China-Iran say there was no violation. She would work to get the EU to also re-impose their sanctions.” Is it safe to say U.S. politicians have the mindset of not following their commitments in JCPOA? What’s your take on the quote from the Podesta emails?
Yes, it is safe to argue that the U.S. did not negotiate JCPOA in good faith. Indeed, the U.S. focus on Iran’s nuclear technology was, from the beginning, a pretext, or a trap. Intelligence agencies of the U.S. (and of the Zionist regime) were well aware of the fact that Iran was not pursuing a nuclear armament agenda. Nonetheless, the U.S. and its allies used the issue as an excuse in order to gradually undermine Iran’s sovereignty and bring it to the fold of its “allies.” Curtailment of Iran’s nuclear technology was only the first item in this imperialist agenda.
Comment