U.S. Secretary Of State Kerry: 'We Have Absolute Knowledge' About
'Certain Military Activities' The Iranians 'Were Engaged In'; Iran Rejects
Outright U.S. Terms For Future Inspection For Example, Inspection Of
By A. Savyon
and Y. Carmon*
June 27, 2015
a June 16, 2015 statement, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry officially
acknowledged that the U.S. is aware of the military dimensions of Iran's nuclear
Kerry said: "The possible military dimensions, frankly, gets distorted a
little bit in some of the discussions in that we're not fixated on Iran
specifically accounting for what they did at one point in time or another... We
know what they did... We have no doubt. We have absolute knowledge with respect
to certain military activities they were engaged in."
statement reveals the Iranian deception, which has been accepted by the Obama
administration, regarding the existence of a fatwa by Iranian Supreme Leader Ali
Khamenei banning nuclear weapons.
Kerry's remarks indicate that the administration knows very well that Khamenei
is lying about the fatwa, and about the ostensible religious ban on nuclear
Concessions Demanded From The U.S. In Order To Allow An Agreement To Be Reached
Concession On Investigating Iran's Possible Military Dimensions (PMD)
clarified that the U.S. was not interested in focusing on Iran's past military
violations, because it is aiming to ensure that the Iranian nuclear program can
be inspected in the future. He said: "What we're concerned about is going
forward. It's critical to us to know that going forward, those activities have
been stopped and that we can account for that in a legitimate way... That
clearly is one of the requirements, in our judgment for what has to be achieved
in order to have a legitimate agreement... And in order to have an agreement, to
trigger any kind of material, significant sanctions relief, we would have to
have those answers."
this statement, the U.S. waives its demand regarding Iran's PMD that is,
that Iran provide explanations to the IAEA on previous suspicions of PMD of its
nuclear program. Without this demand, all future inspection arrangements will be
meaningless, because this concession by the U.S. sets a precedent for Iran to
refrain from responding to any suspicions raised in the future.
U.S. Concession Also On Future Inspections
this point, it appears that the U.S. might back down on future inspections in
two additional areas:
According to as-yet-unverified reports, instead of "any time any
a committee comprising representatives of all countries participating in the
negotiations, including Iran, would decide whether particular suspect Iranian
facilities will be inspected, if they can reach a consensus on this. In this
way, the IAEA will be stripped of all independent authority.
Access to military facilities, if allowed at all and at this time, Iranian
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei, Iran's Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps (IRGC),
the Majlis, and Iran's negotiating team all reject this option out of hand
will no longer be a precondition for an agreement, but will be postponed until
after an agreement is reached.
Went Wrong In The Negotiations Process?
U.S. and Iranian perceptions of the essence and implications of a comprehensive
nuclear agreement are diametrically opposed:
U.S. sees a comprehensive nuclear agreement as a chance to turn over a new leaf
with Iran, and even to obtain U.S. and Western influence in the country, thus
transforming it from a hostile state to a friendly state that shares interests
with the West.
the Obama administration's policy is based on the rescinding of the six UN
Security Council resolutions that punish Iran for its nuclear violations, and is
likewise based on disregarding IAEA reports expressing suspicion that Iran is
committing violations. This is why the Iranian dossier in the IAEA was dealt
with based on the international community's view of Iran as a suspect state with
six UNSC resolutions still pending against it for various nuclear violations.
since the negotiations with Iran were taken over by the Obama administration,
and are no longer in the hands of the EU3, Iran has been transformed from a
suspect state under investigation and punishment to a partner of equal standing
in negotiations, in which its demands have the same status as the demands of the
other side. That is, a quasi-judicial process against a suspect Iran has
become a negotiation between judge and suspect.
this is aimed at transforming Iran de facto into a state friendly to the West
and under Western influence. The model for this is U.S. Secretary of State
Henry Kissinger's bringing Egypt, in the 1970s, and later China and the Soviet
Union, to stances that were friendlier to the West.
Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei completely rejects the U.S.'s view. As far as he is
concerned, the agreement is righting a wrong inflicted on Iran, and has nothing
to do with turning over a new leaf no expurgation of the past, and no
transformation of Iran into a state friendly to the West, open to Western
influence, or sharing Western interests. He perceives these latter notions as a
plot to bring down the ideological camp that he heads, to elevate Iran's
pragmatic camp, and to eliminate the Islamic revolutionary regime a process
which he will prevent. In his view, Iran's future is in reliance on an
independent "resistance economy" and absolutely not on the West
and on foreign investments.
we assess that Khamenei is unwilling to reach any agreement that conforms to
what the U.S. seeks. It will be remembered that in April 2015 at Lausanne, the
Iranians categorically refused to sign anything or even to shake hands
with the other side, and that even a positive outcome to the negotiations will
not be in the form of an agreement between the sides, but will be transferred to
the U.N. Security Council for a resolution.
appears that Khamenei's view has some basis in reality. The Obama administration
is offering all these concessions neither out of naivetι nor as a conciliatory
move per se, but in a realpolitik effort that is manipulative in essence and
imperialist in nature, which aims for regime change in Iran not via authentic
internal processes but by means of external political manipulation. The
ideological camp is also aware of these intentions, and has for several years
been preparing to thwart them, particularly following the emergence of the civil
protest movement of 2009.
as Iran is not letting go of the notion of itself as an empire, it cannot let go
of the idea of American policy as an imperialist attempt to manipulate the
internal power brokers in Iran, to play kingmaker, and to bring down the regime.
This is also why it is suspicious and completely distrustful of the Obama
administration; despite all this administration's gestures to Iran, and its
submission to Iran's demands, its policy is still perceived as nothing more than
part of an imperialist American plot to bring down the current regime. This
attitude explains the widespread use of terminology regarding the U.S. that
regime spokesmen are unwilling to relinquish "the Global
Arrogance," "the Great Satan," and the slogan "Death to
America" that was reiterated by Khamenei most recently on March 21, 2015 in
a speech marking Norooz, the Persian New Year, and in response to President
Obama's Norooz greetings to the Iranian people (see MEMRI
TV Clip No. 4838).
June 4, 2015 statements at the tomb of Iranian regime founder Ayatollah Ruhollah
Khomeini, Khamenei confirmed this position, saying: "Everyone must know
that the Arrogance [the U.S.] is still eying our nation because of its
geopolitical importance and its wealth. They have not retreated, and they
will retreat only when the Iranian nation finds a particular strength and
progress that brings them to despair... The continuation of the use of the
defining and practical term 'the Great Satan,' is highly significant. When a
certain person or a certain apparatus is defined as Satan, then it is obvious
how you should act towards it and how you should feel about it. The Imam [Khomeini]
felt this way about America until his final day, calling it 'the Great Satan'...
This is the logic of the Imam with regard to the struggle against the Arrogance,
and this logic makes it possible for us to understand today's global issues and
the proper position for us to take [regarding them]...
must know that our enemy [the Americans], with its shifting facial expressions
sometimes glowering, sometimes smiling, sometimes with promises, sometimes
with threats aims to take over the country. The enemy wants to regain the
limitless control of Iran [that it once had], and it is against Islam because
Islam vigorously opposes its return... The enemy opposes Islam because it knows
that Islam's dictates are like a mighty dam in its path. It opposes the
Iranian nation because this nation stands fast against it like a mountain. It
will be even more opposed to those in this nation who show greater steadfastness
against it... It is even more opposed to revolutionary organizations and
institutions, and Hizbullah elements [such as the IRGC, the Basij, etc.],
because it knows that they are like a mighty dam that prevents it from
enemy seeks control, and all its efforts are geared towards preventing the
Iranian regime's Islamic movement, which advances the nation. A senior American
statesman said... 'What is important to us is [the regime of] Islamic Iran,
because Iran wants to establish a civilization.' [But] he used the wrong term,
'empire.' He said, 'We must see Iran as our most significant enemy.' This
statement shows us how important it is to build [our] nation."
will continue to obstruct the negotiations, deliberately thwarting
representatives of his rival, the pragmatic camp, by insisting on demands that
can never be met. Not only that, but he can be expected to prevent the pragmatic
camp from implementing the American vision of an agreement that is, opening
Iran to American and Western economic, political, and cultural influences
even if it means using force, which has happened before in the history of the
Savyon is Director of the MEMRI Iranian Media Project; Y. Carmon is President of
 On April 2, 2015 President Obama hinted in a statement following
the Lausanne declaration about his knowledge that Iran's nuclear program
included military dimensions, when he said: "Iran's past efforts to
weaponize its program will be addressed." Whitehouse.gov, April 2, 2015.
 Bnd.com, June 16, 2015.
 See: MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No. 825, Renewed
Iran-West Nuclear Talks Part II: Tehran Attempts to Deceive U.S. President
Obama, Sec'y of State Clinton With Nonexistent Anti-Nuclear Weapons Fatwa By
Supreme Leader Khamenei, April 19, 2012; MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5406, Release
Of Compilation Of Newest Fatwas By Iranian Supreme Leader Khamenei Without
Alleged Fatwa About Nuclear Bomb, August 13, 2013; MEMRI Special Dispatch
No. 5461, President
Obama Endorses The Lie About Khamenei's 'Fatwa' Against Nuclear Arms,
September 29, 2013; MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No.1022, The
Official Iranian Version Regarding Khamenei's Alleged Anti-Nuclear Weapons Fatwa
Is A Lie, Oct 4, 2013; MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5681, Prominent
Iranian Analyst, Author, And Columnist Amir Taheri: Nobody Has Actually Seen
Khamenei's Anti-Nuclear Fatwa, Which Obama Often Quotes, March 17, 2014;
MEMRI Inquiry & Analysis No. 1151, Iranian
Regime Continues Its Lies And Fabrications About Supreme Leader Khamenei's
Nonexistent Fatwa Banning Nuclear Weapons, April 6, 2015.
 Bnd.com, June 16, 2015. State Department spokesman Jeff Rathke
told reporters on June 12, 2015 that there is a possibility that the U.S. would
settle for an agreement between Iran and the IAEA on investigation of the PMD
that would be implemented in the future. It should be mentioned that during the
press briefing, Rathke was asked about Kerry's public statement in April 2015
that the issue of the PMD is a precondition to an agreement, and his current
position that the topic would be addressed after an agreement. State.gov, June
12, 2015. Also see press briefing by State Department spokesman John Kirby on
June 19, 2015.
 The following day, State Department spokesman John Kirby issued a
partial denial and said that there wasn't "any kind of concession or change
in the policy. It's just simply not true... The sanctions lifting will only
occur as Iran takes the steps agreed, including addressing possible military
dimensions." He added: "We've said we're not looking for a confession
(from Iran); we've already made judgments about the past" Cnn.com, June 16,
 On April 2, 2015 President Obama addressed the Lausanne
declaration and said: "This framework would cut off every pathway that Iran
could take to develop a nuclear weapon. Iran will face strict limitations
on its program, and Iran has also agreed to the most robust and intrusive
inspections and transparency regime ever negotiated for any nuclear program in
history. So this deal is not based on trust, its based on unprecedented
verification... International inspectors will have unprecedented access not only
to Iranian nuclear facilities, but to the entire supply chain that supports
Irans nuclear program -- from uranium mills that provide the raw materials,
to the centrifuge production and storage facilities that support the program.
If Iran cheats, the world will know it. If we see something suspicious, we
will inspect it. Iran's past efforts to weaponize its program will be
addressed. With this deal, Iran will face more inspections than any other
country in the world." Whitehouse.gov, April 2, 2015. See also April 6,
2015 statements by U.S. deputy national security adviser for strategic
communication Ben Rhodes to Israel's Channel 2: Asked directly if the IAEA would
have anytime, anywhere access, Rhodes said, Yes, if we see something that we
want to inspect. In the first place we will have anytime, anywhere access
the nuclear facilities, he said, referring to the whole supply chain.
And, he added, if there is a suspicious site, for instance somewhere in a
military base in Iran, and we want to seek access to that, we will be able to go
to the IAEA and get that inspection because of the additional protocol of the
IAEA that Iran will be joining and some of the additional transparency and
inspections measures that are in the deal. Timesofisrael.com, April 6, 2015.
Also, see June 8, 2015 statements by U.S. Deputy Secretary of State Antony J.
Blinken: "[W]e would not agree to a deal unless the IAEA is granted access
to whatever Iranian sites are required to verify that Irans program is
exclusively peaceful period. State.gov, June 8, 2015. Also see U.S.
document published following the Lausanne declaration on April 2, 2015:
"Iran will be required to grant access to the IAEA to investigate
suspicious sites or allegations of a covert enrichment facility, conversion
facility, centrifuge production facility, or yellowcake production facility
anywhere in the country." State.gov, April 2, 2015.
 It should be mentioned that contrary to the U.S. administration's
claim that its initiative began only after the election of Iranian President
Rohani, the pragmatic camp representative, in 2013, the U.S. began secret
negotiations with Iran during the era of his predecessor, President Mahmoud
 The "Death to America" slogan is one of the main focuses
of both the pragmatic and ideological camps in Iran. See MEMRI Inquiry &
Analysis No. 1025, The
Struggle Between Khamenei And Rafsanjani Over The Iranian Leadership Part
VI: Despite Rafsanjani's Push To Omit 'Death To America' Slogan, Demonstrators
At Tehran Friday Sermon Persist In Chanting It, Wave Placards Against Obama,
Rafsanjani, October 10, 2013, and MEMRI Special Dispatch No. 5499, The
Struggle Between Khamenei And Rafsanjani Over The Iranian Leadership Part
VIII: Rafsanjani Receives Death Threats, October 28, 2013.
 Tasnim (Iran), June 4, 2015.