By
Matthew
Russell Lee
UNITED
NATIONS,
August 30 --
Amid the P5+1
Iran talks,
the US on
August 29
announced new
Iran-related
sanctions. It
targeted among
others banks,
including
Tajikistan-based
Kafolatbank,
“owned by
Sarmayeh Bank,
which was
identified as
an Iranian
financial
institution by
the U.S.
Department of
the Treasury
in July 2012.”
On August 30,
Iranian
president
Hassan Rouhani
held a lengthy
press
conference in
Tehran, saying
on this that
of the P5+1
group the
other country
whose good
will is in
doubt is the
United States.
He denounced
the sanctions
and said it is
unclear if
he'll go to
the UN General
Assembly week
in New York or
to the
“environmental
meeting” just
before it. If
not, Foreign
Minister Zarif
will lead the
delegation.
Journalist
Jason Rezaian
was asked
about, but the
question was
not answered.
The Free
UN Coalition
for Access
believes it should
be, as
other press
freedom
questions
should not go
UNaddressed.
Just as the US
has said it
will not
coordinate
with Iran in
striking ISIL,
Rouhani said
while fighting
terrorism if
good, Iran
will not
cooperate or
coordinate
with the US.
One wondered,
was this a
coordinated
statement, or
just each side
playing to
some
home-country
sentiments?
On a
background
call on August
29 with Senior
Administration
Officials,
many of the
questions were
about Russia
(they were not
answered, at
least not on
the call).
Back on July
18 as the
deadline for
the Iran
nuclear talks
loomed, the
Joint Plan of
Action was
extended until
November 24.
Three Senior
US
Administration
Officials
(SAOs) held a
press call on
background.
The first SAO
spoke against
moves in
Congress to
legislate on
new or future
sanctions,
saying that
could
undermine P5+1
unity.
The second SAO
said that
while the US
is concerned
about Iran's
activities in
Syria, in Gaza
and in Iraq,
only
long-range
missiles that
could carry
nuclear
weapons would
be addressed
in the talks.
The third SAO
bragged that
$2.8 billion
in the next
four months
will not begin
to fix Iran's
economy, and
that the US
will emphasize
that Iran is
not open for
business, its
central bank
is under
sanctions.
But didn't BNP
Paribas still
do business in
Iran? On a
related note,
France's
outgoing
ambassador to
the UN Gerard
Araud on July
18 said the
the Mistral
ships being
sold "are not
destroyers but
transportation
and command
ships." (A
reply: they
are amphibious
assault
vessels.) With
this attitude,
what's next?
Back
on June 16
with the P5+1
talks starting
in Vienna, the
question arose
how ISIL's
advance in
Iraq might
impact them.
On June 16 a
Senior State
Department
Official told
the press, "We
are open to
engaging the
Iranians, just
as we are
engaging other
regional
players on the
threat post by
ISIL in Iraq.
The issue did
come up
briefly with
Iran on the
margins of the
P5+1 in Vienna
today,
separate from
our trilateral
meeting. These
engagements
will not
include
military
coordination
or strategic
determinations
about Iraq’s
future over
the heads of
the Iraqi
people. We
will discuss
how ISIL
threatens many
countries in
the region,
including
Iran, and the
need to
support
inclusivity in
Iraq and
refrain from
pressing a
sectarian
agenda."
Earlier on
June 16 a US
Senior
Administration
Official told
reporters the
issue does not
give Iran more
leverage,
while talks
about Iraq may
occur "on the
margins," that
is separate
from the P5+1
process.
Asked of
timing, the US
official said
"we are all
focused on
July 20... we
can get this
done."
We'll continue
to follow
this.
Watch
this site.
, 
