NOURNEWS - "Our goal in the Vienna talks is to have a better understanding of how to achieve a state of adherence to adherence," State Department spokesman Ned Price said yesterday.
Adherence versus adherence is an issue that has been endorsed and emphasized by the negotiating parties in the Council since the beginning. This method of interaction has the right logic and JCPOA was formed on this basis. Clauses 26, 36 and 37 of JCPOA were also included in JCPOA to protect this pivotal pillar.
Naturally, given the parties' lack of trust in each other in the nuclear negotiations, a framework based on action against action had to be established and agreed upon.
In fact, Resolution 2231 also supported this basic principle in JCPOA.
Over time, it can be concluded that the United States has been reluctant to implement its commitments in the form of JCPOA from the very beginning, and this non-commitment to JCPOA is not unique to the Trump administration because under Obama, JCPOA was openly violated seven times. Exactly one day after the implementation of this agreement, on January 17, 2015, twenty natural and legal people were sanctioned. Also, with the imposition of the Immigration Restriction (ISA) by Obama, we saw examples of obvious violation of this agreement, which Trump finally took a clearer stance on.
In the meantime, in order to protect the fledgling JCPOA agreement, Iran has chosen to adhere to its commitments and actions in the face of the US government's non-compliance. Perhaps this goodwill of Iran conveyed the wrong message to the Americans about Iran's adherence to JCPOA at any cost.
However, the rule of adherence to adherence was completely violated by the US unilateral withdrawal from JCPOA. But to show goodwill, Iran still adhered to its commitments, despite the US refusal to abide by its commitments, and practically adhered to the principle of adherence to US non-adherence.
Time has shown that this approach of Iran not only did not punish the United States, but also deluded the European countries committed to compensating for the damage caused by the withdrawal of the United States from JCPOA, and an expectation was formed in the West that Iran should reciprocate the US and Europe. Remain committed to fulfilling its obligations.
Since May 2019, when the Supreme National Security Council announced that the US policy of maximum pressure was challenged by Iran adopting a strategy of active resistance, and the step-by-step process of reducing Iran's adherence to JCPOA commitments began, the rule of non-adherence to non-adherence to space It began between the parties present in JCPOA and the member that withdrew from the agreement with Iran, and was fully completed by the parliament with the approval of the law "Strategic Action to Lift Sanctions and Protect the Rights of the Iranian Nation."
Now, after the Biden administration takes office and his administration acknowledges the failure of the policy of maximum pressure, the United States has formally announced a strategy of adherence to adherence, emphasizing that it will not take any action before Iran re-enters the adherence principle.
The International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), as the oversight body, has ratified Iran's adherence to its obligations before the United States withdrew from the IAEA Board, and even months after that, by issuing 15 official reports. If Iran, one year after the withdrawal of the United States from JCPOA, decides to reduce its compliance with its obligations under Articles 26 and 36 of JCPOA, it is only because of retaliatory action and in response to US illegal conduct.
Therefore, it is possible to revive the principle of adherence to adherence only if the US government, as a member violating the principle of adherence to adherence, changes its behavior not in the position of baseless words, but in a real and practical way, and by canceling the reaffirm its commitment to all sanctions.
Only if such a situation arises is it possible to revive the principle of adherence to adherence.
If the US government really believes in the strategy of adherence to adherence, as stated by the State Department spokesman, it should take this step without delay and compensate for the past illegal actions and pave the way for the reactivation of the adherence to adherence principle.
NOURNEWS