4 ms·
The US/Israel haven't earned trust themselves by their actions though. There were ongoing negotiations which unsurprisingly have now ended. There are no clear
by NomDePlum 1y ago
The US/Israel haven't earned trust themselves by their actions though.
There were ongoing negotiations which unsurprisingly have now ended.
There are no clear indications Iran was in breach and they levels of enrichment were allowed by the terms. Although that was part of the point of the negotiations which the US wanted to raise.
- nickff 1y agoThe USA had abandoned the prior deal some time ago, and was not party to any current agreement which authorized any Iranian nuclear activities. Thus Iran was neither in compliance or abeyance of any agreement with them. Iran has not earned much trust with anyone either; they’ve been supporting the Russian aggression in Ukraine (where nuclear strikes have been repeatedly threatened), as well as sponsoring non-state actors which have attacked the USA and Israel.
- NomDePlum 1y agoYes, true. You are right that the US exited the JCPOA under Trump in 2018 and hasn't rejoined a new deal. So not direct agreement between Iran and the US on enrichment limits. But, Iran is still legally bound by the NPT and IAEA safeguards, which require transparency around nuclear technology with the other parties who remain. Prior to Israels attacks there were also indications the US was about to re-enter negotiations. That went up in smoke and likely motivation of the attacks.
- dlubarov 1y agoWhat do you mean about "no clear indications Iran was in breach"? Iran was in breach of its safeguards agreement with the IAEA, according to a resolution by the IAEA board [1]. > Finds that Iran’s many failures to uphold its obligations since 2019 [...] constitutes non-compliance with its obligations under its Safeguards Agreement with the Agency [1] https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/25/06/gov2025-38.pdf https://www.iaea.org/sites/default/files/25/06/gov2025-38.pd...