Home > Uncategorized > Senator Dianne Feinstein’s Response to Open Letter – & Reply

Senator Dianne Feinstein’s Response to Open Letter – & Reply

September 10, 2015 Leave a comment Go to comments

feinstein_custom-3a53b35ea7156bd1d791b70bbe5d913d7650072b-s6-c30

Reply to Senator Dianne Feinstein’s Response:

Dear Senator Dianne Feinstein,

Thank you for responding to my letter. In your email you have elaborated on the provisions of the JCPOA.  However, in my view, most of these provisions are flawed as indicated below:

Provision of JCPOA: “A reduction in the number of installed centrifuges by two thirds, from more than 19,000 to 6,000, for at least 10 years.”

My concern: Why the regime should be allowed to keep 19,000 centrifuges? This provision permits the regime to keep far more nuclear-related capacity than it would need if it were interested only in peaceful civil application of the nuclear program. Based on the JCPOA the regime is permitted to continue conducting R&D on advanced centrifuges. By keeping almost its entire nuclear infrastructure intact the regime can industrialize them after 8 years.

Provision of JCPOA: “24/7 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to all of Iran’s declared nuclear sites for 15 years.”

My concern: This is not true, based on a confidential agreement between UN’s IAEA and the Iranian regime, the inspection of the Parchin site for any suspicious nuclear activity is left for the regime to perform and the agency has no say on this matter but to accept the regime’s report.

It is imperative to understand while it is customary for IAEA UN nuclear watchdog to hold confidential agreements with normal democratic countries, given that Iranian regime is considered as a theocratic-terrorist state that does not comply with universal norms and standards, concluding such agreements cannot be justified.

Provisions of JCPOA: “ 1) The imposition of intrusive inspections by the IAEA of Iran’s centrifuge production and storage facilities for 20 years and of Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain for 25 years;  2)IAEA access to all suspected nuclear sites within 24 days, including military facilities.”

My concern: First, these two provisions contrast each other; second, 24 days advance notice will provide the regime enough time to conceal the evidence on any undeclared non-enriching nuclear activities or sites, which means the deal does not allow surprise anytime, anywhere inspection.

Provision of JCPOA: “Another strong part of the JCPOA is the manner in which sanctions are addressed ………………. Additionally, the agreement carefully preserves the right of the international community to re-impose, or snapback, ………”

My concern: In case the regime fails to comply with the terms of the accord, reinstatement of the lifted international sanctions by UN Security Council will be problematic.

More shortcomings of the JCPOA are reflected as follows:

Under the JCPOA the regime is permitted to work and build ballistic missiles. The regime will position itself to break out of nuclear constraints when the agreement’s provisions expire and as a result the deal will fuel a dangerous nuclear arms race in the Middle East.

Moreover previously in the old UN Security Council Resolution 1929 (page 5, item 9), the Council used mandatory language “shall not” where it said, “It decides that Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons”. The new UN Security Council Resolution 2231 (page 99, item 3) however changes the mandatory “shall” to an inferior language “call upon not to”, where it says “Iran is called upon not to undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles.” The question is why the inferior language should be accepted that changes the mandatory shall to a permissive call upon?

Additionally according to this nuclear agreement, US is going to help Iran (language is included on page 142) protect their nuclear sites and systems from an outsider threat, i.e., Israeli attack. Why US instead of abandoning the nuclear operation of such rogue state, helps to sustain it.

The agreement also provides Iranian regime with extensive relief from economic sanctions, which will fuel the regime’s ability to support dangerous proxies throughout the Middle East, which means the deal will make the world much less safe.

Finally it is imperative to mention the egregious human rights record in Iran has been overlooked for nuclear negotiation. The agreement fails to hold the regime accountable for its war against its own people, the P5+1 has literally turned blind eye to the regime’s horrors faced by the people of Iran. The regime has sought to cast an image of “moderation” after Hassan Rouhani was selected as President. In point of fact, Iran’s human rights situation has only gotten worse, Amnesty International reports indicates that the Iranian government has had the highest rate of execution over the last couple of years, since its establishment in 1979.

Given the irrational behavior of the regime the current JCPOA will not prevent a war, it just delays it. US Policy makers should not forget that the Iranian people, who are the main target of the regime’s human rights abuses, should be considered stakeholders in these nuclear talks.

The alternative to the JCPOA is an agreement that force the terrorist regime of Iran to implement the above alarms plus the human rights and the terrorism issues.

In my article in family security matters I have discussed in more details about the concerns and issues regarding the shortcomings of the JCPOA, the alternative to this agreement, and more importantly that the deal will not only prevent a war but de facto triggers one.

Thank you Senator for noting and keeping in mind my views in the coming weeks.

Sincerely,

Mansur Rastani, PhD

Sept. 10, 2015

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Senator’s Response (Dated Sept. 10, 2015) to Open Letter Dated Aug 31, 2015:

.

From: United State Senatefeinstein_custom-3a53b35ea7156bd1d791b70bbe5d913d7650072b-s6-c30

U.S. Senator Dianne Feinstein

To: mansurrastani@gmail.com

Sept 10, 2015

____________________________

Dear Mansur:

Thank you for contacting me regarding the recently concluded agreement between the world’s major powers and Iran.  I appreciate hearing from you on this important topic, and I welcome the opportunity to respond.

As you may know, on July 14, 2015, a final comprehensive agreement was announced between the world’s major powers—the United States, United Kingdom, France, Russia, China, and Germany (also known as the P5+1)—and Iran. The agreement will verifiably ensure that Iran cannot obtain a nuclear weapon.  I believe this historic diplomatic agreement, which is formally known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), is strong, and I intend to support it.

The JCPOA includes a number of important provisions, including:

  • A reduction in the number of installed centrifuges by two thirds, from more than 19,000 to 6,000, for at least 10 years;
  • A reduction of Iran’s stockpile of enriched uranium by more than 97% and to no more than 300 kilograms of 3.67% enriched uranium for 15 years.  This is not enough nuclear material for a single weapon;
  • A modification of the Arak heavy-water reactor so that it cannot produce weapons-grade plutonium, and requiring spent fuel to be shipped out of Iran for the life of the reactor;
  • 24/7 International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) access to all of Iran’s declared nuclear sites for 15 years;
  • The imposition of intrusive inspections by the IAEA of Iran’s centrifuge production and storage facilities for 20 years and of Iran’s entire nuclear supply chain for 25 years;
  • IAEA access to all suspected nuclear sites within 24 days, including military facilities;
  • Permanent IAEA access to all of Iran’s nuclear sites under the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty; and
  • A perpetual prohibition against Iran ever seeking, developing, or acquiring a nuclear weapon.

Another strong part of the JCPOA is the manner in which sanctions are addressed.  Before any new sanctions relief occurs, the IAEA must certify that Iran has met important obligations under the agreement, including cooperating with the IAEA’s investigation into Iran’s past nuclear weapons-related activities.  Additionally, the agreement carefully preserves the right of the international community to re-impose, or snapback, sanctions against Iran if it violates any part of the agreement.

Finally, nothing in this agreement prevents the United States from using any other means necessary to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon, including through the use of force. As President Obama stated on July 14, 2015, all options to prevent Iran from developing a nuclear weapon will remain available to him and future presidents should Iran fail to comply with this agreement.

Before the JCPOA is fully implemented, Congress has 60 days to receive extensive briefings, hold hearings, and vote to disapprove, approve, or take no vote with respect to the agreement. I have followed multilateral negotiations with Iran closely over the past two years, and have reviewed the agreement and its annexes thoroughly.

I truly believe that that the alternative to the agreement with Iran is no agreement at all. Should the Congress vote to disapprove of the agreement, the worst of both worlds will likely occur: Iran’s nuclear program would once again be unconstrained and the other parties of the P5+1 would begin to reduce or entirely remove their sanctions. This would be the worst possible outcome with respect to Iran. As a result, I intend to support the agreement and vote against any Resolution of Disapproval that comes to the Senate floor.

Secretary John Kerry and the U.S. negotiators were able to overcome decades of enmity and extract serious and binding concessions from Iran, and they deserve enormous credit for this agreement.  I believe this agreement will ultimately make the United States, Israel, and all our allies safer.

Please know that I have carefully noted your views, and I will keep your thoughts in mind in the coming weeks.

Once again, thank you for writing.  I hope that you will continue to keep me informed about issues of importance to you.  Should you have any further comments or questions, please feel free to contact my Washington, D.C., office at (202) 224-3841 or visit my website at www.feinstein.senate.gov.  Best regards.

.

Sincerely yours,

Dianne Feinstein
United States Senator

.

Further information about my position on issues of concern to California and the nation are available at my website,feinstein.senate.gov. And please visit my YouTubeFacebook and Twitter for more ways to communicate with me.

.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^

Open letter submitted on August 31:

Dear Congressman,

As you are aware, on July 14, 2015, US administration along with other international members of the P5+1 group reached the Iran nuclear agreement, referred to Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA).

This agreement permits the regime to keep far more nuclear-related capacity than it would need if it were interested only in peaceful civil application of the nuclear program. Also the entire exercise of negotiating with Iranian government is flawed given that it relies too much on trust of the regime. Obama’s logic that Iranian regime is deterrable and “alternative to Iran deal is war” are misleading. Iranian regime is a criminal state because time after time it commits crime against humanity, domestically and transnationally. The nuclear agreement provides the theocratic regime with extensive relief from economic sanctions, which will fuel the regime’s ability to support its dangerous proxies throughout the Middle East.  It would be the turning point for the regime to resume its expansionist regional project, inspired by the Iranian constitution’s preamble stating Iran must spread its Islamic revolution. This means the Middle East will witness the spread of even further chaos and hostilities throughout the whole region. The IRI constitution de facto proclaims the ideological mission of Jihad; any deal that ignores the purpose of the regime’s bellicosity will not only be unsuccessful but will endanger the regional and global security. Negotiation with terrorists doesn’t prevent war, it just delays it, which is why the protocol clearly emphasizes “you don’t negotiate with terrorists.”

More importantly, the agreement fails to hold the authoritarian regime accountable for its egregious human rights record in Iran, the P5+1 has literally turned blind eye to the regime’s horrors faced by the Iranian people.  The regime has sought to cast an image of “moderation” after Hassan Rouhani was selected as President. In point of fact, Iran’s human rights situation has only gotten worse, Amnesty International reports indicates that the Iranian government has had the highest rate of execution over the last couple of years, since its establishment in 1979. US Policy makers should not forget that the Iranian people, who are the main target of the regime’s human rights abuses, should be considered as the main stakeholders in these nuclear talks.

The voice of Iranian civic movements inside and outside Iran has never gained the world leaders’ attention and their political patronage. These leaders have never borne in mind providing moral boost to the democracy-promoting political forces of Iran, neither have they shown political support for the tens and hundreds of protests of the Iranian people around the world. During the bloody national uprising of the Iranian people in 2009, Obama was busy writing secret appeasing letters to the criminal leader of the Mullahs’ regime, who has stifled the spreading national discontent in the country for decades. Obama’s administration has on numerous occasions assured the mullahs’ regime that US will not pursue regime change in Iran. The theocratic regime sees that its survival is not threatened, no matter what it does. It sees, as does everyone else, that transgressions are, in fact, rewarded. These unnecessary and unjustified remarks, while have given a new life to the regime’s despotic rulers, have sucked the positive energy out of the Iranian dissidents.

The liberal sector of the Iranian populace, whose number have dramatically been increasing during the last three decades, have been in defiance of the theocracy establishment covertly and overtly from the get go that the Islamic regime came to power. They are seeking a secular democratic government based on the principles of human rights. Today it has been the focus of much concern and criticism from the Iranian grassroots regarding the pact that Obama has made with the regime’s mullahs while ignoring the voice of the oppressed people of Iran on the agreement that is an implication of his endorsement of the regime’s dreadful human rights record at home and its active sponsorship of terrorism beyond the border.

However, US should know that the authoritarian regime’s attempts in silencing the Iranian dissidents and restricting their freedom cannot carry on for long and would ultimately fail. The timing is ripe, Iran’s economy has been going to sink and the regime’s hold on power has increasingly becoming unstable. The power of inner freedom has given the dissidents the courage to cross the line from living in fear and reaching the point to question the enemy of their liberty. They know that they will eventually prevail in altering the geopolitical equation surrounding the destiny of their country to their own favor. The regime has never been so vulnerable; its leaders fear the alliance and consensus of the Iranian people more than any foreign threat.

There is a vital need for a regime change in Iran, the free world must respond, the leaders of free world have to listen more closely to Iran’s dissidents. They must not ignore the insights of the Iranian grassroots, which remind them that dictators in particular of theocratic ones are not their strategic allies and are certainly not guarantors of long-term stability, it is the peaceful, secular, and democratic people of Iran that they need to rely on and truly align with in order to ensure the regional and global safety, security, and prosperity.

“People of Iran” is the only right alternative to Iran dilemma. This deal and any cooperative engagement with the terrorist mullahs’ regime should be stopped. The imposition of smart political and economic sanctions that target and paralyze the nuts and bolts of the leadership structure of the Iranian regime, not the populace, should be intensified. Concurrent political support and material for the struggle of dissidents, logistically and strategically, would be the next essential step to put an end to the life of the blood-sucking regime of IRI by the hands of the Iranian dissidents.

On behalf of repressed people of Iran I ask that you and your colleagues oppose this “deal” with the Iranian government before your September 17 deadline. Specifically, I ask that you vote against the agreement and prepare to override an Obama veto, if necessary.

On behalf of repressed people of Iran,

Mansur Rastani, PHD

August 31, 2015

Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: