Iran nuclear deal: Obama says US partisanship gone too far

[B-Dragon]

■Iran nuclear deal: Obama says US partisanship gone too far

Media caption President Obama: "Now we have the senator suggesting that our secretary of state is purposely misinterpreting the deal and giving the Supreme Leader of Iran the benefit of the doubt"

Iran nuclear crisis

• Iran nuclear crisis: Six key points

  3 April 2015
• Iran nuclear deal has hungry investors circling

  6 April 2015
• Can US Congress kill the Iran deal?

  3 April 2015
• Iranians celebrate nuclear deal in Tehran and online

  3 April 2015

US President Barack Obama has said that partisanship over the Iran nuclear deal has gone too far.

He rebuked the stance of some Republicans in the US Congress.

But one of those criticised by the president - Senator John McCain - said that there were discrepancies between US and Iranian versions of the deal.

An outline agreement on the future shape of Iran's nuclear programme was reached after marathon talks with six major powers earlier in April.

Some Republicans have argued against the deal, saying that Iran has received too many concessions.

Mr McCain suggested last week that Secretary of State John Kerry's explanations of the framework agreement were "somehow less trustworthy" than those of Iran's supreme leader.

Mr McCain has repeatedly expressed his reservations over the deal

And he argued on Saturday that discrepancies between US and Iranian versions of the deal extended to inspections, sanctions relief and other key issues.

"It is undeniable that the version of the nuclear agreement outlined by the Obama administration is far different from the one described by Iran's supreme leader,'' Mr McCain said in a statement.

"I strongly agree with two of America's most eminent statesmen, former Secretaries of State Henry Kissinger and George Shultz, who last week laid out the serious consequences of this deal for our nation's security."

Partisan wrangling

The deal aims to prevent Tehran making a nuclear weapon in exchange for phased sanction relief.

A deadline has been set for 30 June to reach a comprehensive pact. Tough negotiations still lie ahead.

President Obama, speaking after a regional conference in Panama, said he remained "absolutely positive'' that the deal was the surest way to prevent Iran obtaining nuclear arms,

Earlier, Iran's Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei said that a final agreement must result in an immediate end to all sanctions.

President Obama said on Saturday that Mr Khamenei was simply addressing his own country's internal politics.

Mr Khamenei also said the details of any final deal would be crucial

"Even a guy with the title 'Supreme Leader' has to be concerned about his own constituencies," he said.

Mr Obama went on to criticise the attitudes of some Republican senators who have been highly sceptical about the emerging agreement with Iran.

Right to review

Mr Obama said that entrenched partisanship was no way to run foreign policy.

The framework agreement was announced by the European Union and Iran after eight days of negotiations in Switzerland.

The talks at Lausanne's Beau-Rivage Palace hotel between Iran and the so-called P5+1 - the US, UK, France, China and Russia plus Germany - continued beyond the original, self-imposed deadline of 31 March.

The outline agreement has also been criticised by members of Congress who want US lawmakers to have the right to review any final deal.

■Iran nuclear crisis: Six key points

Iran nuclear crisis

• Iran nuclear deal has hungry investors circling

  6 April 2015
• Can US Congress kill the Iran deal?

  3 April 2015
• Iranians celebrate nuclear deal in Tehran and online

  3 April 2015
• A result which buys time

  3 April 2015

Iran and six world powers have reached a framework agreement to curb the Iranian nuclear programme in exchange for the lifting of sanctions, a step towards a comprehensive accord that could end a 12-year stand-off.

We're at a pivotal moment in one of the world's most serious crises

The long-running dispute has heightened tensions between Iran and the West, but a comprehensive accord could bring down diplomatic barriers.

The full details still have to be agreed before a 30 June deadline, but US President Barack Obama was quick to celebrate what he called "a historic understanding with Iran".

The crisis could turn much worse, however, were the negotiations to collapse.

It's about fear and distrust

Years of distrust and suspicion have made the crisis over Iran's nuclear programme hard to solve, but negotiators set 31 March as a deadline to reach a framework deal. Although they missed the deadline, a tentative accord was struck soon after, on 2 April.

The so-called P5+1 group of powers - the US, UK, France, Russia, China and Germany - want to be satisfied that Iran won't have the capacity to make a bomb in under a year if it decided to - the so-called "break-out" time.

Iran for its part says it does not want a nuclear bomb, but insists on exercising its right to run a peaceful nuclear industry. It also wants crippling international sanctions lifted quickly.

Many countries do not believe Iran's declared intentions, and there is fear of what Iran might do with a nuclear weapon, and of the prospect of a nuclear arms race in one of the world's most unstable regions.

Sense of history as talks go to the wire

Lots of countries have nuclear weapons, but Iran's case is different

It looks to some like Iran is being singled out - after all, many countries have nuclear programmes and at least eight possess nuclear weapons. The reason why such attention has been focused on Iran is because it hid a clandestine uranium enrichment programme for 18 years, in breach of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT).

As a result, the UN Security Council passed six resolutions requiring Iran to stop enriching uranium, a process which can ultimately produce the fissile material for a nuclear weapon.

Iran agreed to suspend parts of its nuclear programme under a temporary agreement in 2013 in return for some sanctions relief, but this was a stop-gap deal, not an end to the crisis.

What also worries the international community are unanswered questions surrounding possible military dimensions to Iran's nuclear programme.

A 2007 US intelligence report said Iran had a nuclear weapons programme but "halted" this in 2003.

The global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), has been investigating this in parallel to the main nuclear talks, but says Iran has not provided enough information about its past activities. These include possible nuclear-related tests at a secret military site, where Iran has barred IAEA inspectors.

Iran says the international community is displaying double standards by not doing anything about its arch-foe Israel, which is widely believed to have a nuclear arsenal - though Israel has neither confirmed nor denied this. Israel however, like nuclear-armed India and Pakistan, is not a signatory to the NPT.

Mapping Iran's key nuclear sites

Iran has been severely hit by sanctions

Since Iran's undisclosed nuclear activities came to light, it has been hit by a raft of sanctions - by the UN, EU, US and other countries.

These include a ban on the supply of heavy weaponry and nuclear-related technology to Iran, a block on arms exports, asset-freezes, travel bans, bans on trade in precious metals, and bans on crude oil exports and banking transactions, among others.

Under the 2013 interim deal, Iran got some sanctions relief in return for curbing its enrichment activities.

The sanctions are believed to have contributed to a fall in the value of the Iranian riyal and to rising inflation, with the cost of basic foodstuffs and fuel soaring. This has hit ordinary Iranians, with some rare protests reported.

According to the framework agreement, sanctions will be gradually phased out as the global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), confirm‎s Iranian compliance.

What are the sanctions on Iran?

How ordinary Iranians see the nuclear talks

Some countries are unhappy about the framework deal

The prospect of a deal which leaves Iran with any capacity whatsoever to build a bomb has alarmed Israel and Iran's neighbours in the Gulf.

Iran believes Israel should not exist. Israel sees a nuclear Iran as a major threat to it and the wider world.

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has warned that the framework deal poses a grave danger to the region. On 2 April, he asserted: "Israel will not accept an agreement which allows a country that vows to annihilate us to develop nuclear weapons."

Saudi Arabia, the Sunni-ruled regional rival to Shia Iran, also fears a compromise deal will not stop Iran eventually getting a nuclear bomb. Saudi Arabia also worries that an end to sanctions will embolden and strengthen Iran economically and militarily.

Both Israel and Saudi Arabia, the US' key allies in the region, feel Washington is putting a deal with Iran before their security needs.

This is not the end of it

The framework deal does not mean the crisis is over by a long shot. The P5+1 and Iran must now agree on all technical details by the end of June.

While a deal might defuse the stand-off between Iran and world powers, Israel has warned it could fuel a nuclear arms race in the Middle East. Under this scenario, countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia could seek to equip themselves with nuclear weapons before Iran gets a chance to.

There are also strong opponents to a deal in both Iran and the US. In Iran, hardliners have expressed disappointment, while in Washington members of Congress have threatened to impose fresh sanctions on Iran.

President Obama himself has said he will support fresh sanctions against Iran if it does not uphold any agreement.

/ Copyright © 2015 BBC.