‘Greed of Wall Street prevents Iran nuclear deal from being signed’
RT:The Iran nuclear talks seem to be in deadlock. There's still no deal in sight in Vienna, one more deadline has expired and apparently the framework pact for the talks has now been extended until Monday. Do you think we are going to see any kind of deal eventually?
Caleb Maupin: There is absolutely no rational reason that a deal wouldn’t go through. The people of the US, they want peace and further cooperation with Iran. The people of Iran want further cooperation with the US. The only thing that is getting in the way of a deal being signed and better cooperation between our two countries is the greed of Wall Street. The oil companies, the weapons manufacturers, the Israeli government and its network of supporters are really committed to preventing any deal from going forward. And even though all humanity wants peace we are really seeing every effort being made to prevent a deal from being signed and it’s very frightening to see these continued extensions of these negotiations.
RT:US Secretary of State John Kerry said there are still some sticking points to iron out during the talks. But just moments later, Kerry said the US is prepared to abandon the talks, unless Iran signs the deal soon. Why do you think he is sending such mixed messages at this critical time? Is that putting pressure on Iran?
CM: Absolutely, it is. John Kerry needs to remember where he came from. His career began as a protester. He stood up to Wall Street and protested the Vietnam War when he came back from Vietnam and he opposed that war, he had courage to stand up to the forces that like war – the war makers and the profiteers. That’s where his career began and he really needs to look at where he came from because everyone wants this deal to go through. Humanity is almost unanimous in wanting there to be an end to the sanctions on Iran and peace between the two countries. So he needs to stand up to the pressure of those who have another agenda. What’s preventing a deal from being signed at this point is the US making ridiculous demands here at the last moment, making impossible demands. What country in the world would allow every military site to be inspected by any foreign countries? That’s an outrageous demand, especially for Iran, which has been under attack since 1979 and facing endless attacks, subversions, invasions, protecting itself ever since its 1979 revolution.
We are seeing the US at the last moment making ridiculous demands as a kind of concession to the very wealthy and powerful forces in the US that don’t want a deal to go through and it’s very unfortunate. So many people in Iran, in the US, their hopes have been lifted by these negotiations. They are really hoping that there can be success and to see our elected officials just cave into pressure like this is very disturbing. Iran is not a threat to the US, Iran is not developing nuclear weapons, it’s fully complied with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and at the negotiating table it’s been willing to make great concessions. Yet the US is just not willing to budge and make peace with Iran and that’s very frightening, especially due to the fact that Iran is the country that is scoring so many victories against ISIS. It’s Iran and Syria that are scoring great victories against Daesh, ISIS whatever you want to call them. So if the US is actually serious about wanting to fight terrorism in the Middle East it should get start to get along with Iran and think about who the real enemies are, who the real threat to stability in that region is.
RT:You mentioned those opposed to this deal, many of them are Republicans in the Congress. But the Congress goes on its summer break on Saturday. People need a deal before that for Congress to pass the bill and lift the sanctions. What do you make of it?
CM: I think that there has been a section of the ruling elite here in the US who has said from the beginning they will not allow there to be peace between the US and Iran. And it’s not just Republicans, there are many figures within the Democratic Party that are connected to the oil companies and the weapons manufacturers and the Israel lobby. These organizations, which represent very rich and powerful people, they have control of a lot of elected officials in the US. As much as the government of the US claims to represent all the people that’s not necessarily the case. Often the richest and the most powerful corporations, the oil cartels they exercise quite a bit of power in legislation and in Washington DC and we are seeing it on full display. Why can’t there be peace between the US and Iran, why not? Whose interest is stopping a deal really serving? Who are the politicians really working for when they continue to be so hostile to Iran?
Iran nuclear talks: ‘US doesn’t want deal, it wants to contain Iran’
The US wants to intimidate the states involved in the Iran nuclear talks, to have them on board to impose further sanctions, and the deal as it stands with the demands placed on Iran is impossible, says researcher and writer Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich.
RT:The US is reportedly refusing to accept Iran's rights, particularly concerning the relief from sanctions. At the same time the US has tested a mock nuclear gravity bomb in Nevada. What do you make of a country so bothered by Iran having nuclear energy testing its own nuclear bomb abilities?
Soraya Sepahpour-Ulrich: One can’t speak enough about the hypocrisy of US foreign policy and if you want to waste time about how they’ve been always been hypocritical and have double standards then you will be speaking forever about this issue. It’s well known to everybody, including Americans. I think what is very important to understand is that US foreign policy remains unchanged; it’s been unchanged for decades. And even with regard to Iran or even Russia, it’s never liked the idea of peaceful coexistence. To borrow from [President Dwight] Eisenhower ‘peaceful coexistence’ would mean that – at that time he was speaking about the Soviet Union, today Mr. Obama is repeating the pattern with Iran – would mean, in effect, that the adversary has won the war without actual military confrontation. And what the US has been planning for decades has been total global domination.
RT:Could that have an impact when the negotiations are at such critical stage?
SSU: I don’t think Iran likes coercion any more than Russia or any other country does, but the fact of the matter is if the US could in fact attack Iran and get away scot-free without too much damage to itself it would not be talking with Iran at the moment. In fact, there was an Iran project in which they actually weighed what would happen if there was an attack and it was concluded that it would not be in America’s favor… and that was when they restarted the talks again. But I think they want to intimidate the countries involved in these talks and I don’t think they are just aimed at Iran; they are aimed at Russia or China, the EU countries involved because in their thinking if the US should attack Iran, Iran would retaliate by defending itself by closing the Strait of Hormuz, and if that’s closed for even a day or a week the impact it would have on global markets - especially European and Chinese - would be unimaginable. So I think the US is trying to intimidate the other allies to get on board with the US not to work a deal with Iran, but basically to contain Iran and that’s been the goal all along. It’s never been about a win-win situation which Iran called for.
RT:America and Europe's top diplomats have warned there won't be a deal, unless the necessary decisions are made soon. How much pressure does this put on Iran?
SSU: Absolutely, it keeps pushing the goal posts every time. They had a framework in Lausanne which was basically agreed to – they had to hammer out the details. The US keeps departing from that and pushing the goal posts and making excessive demands on Iran in the hopes of Iran pulling out of the talks. The US does not want a nuclear deal with Iran, the US would very much like to have the rest of the countries involved on board with it to impose further sanctions and to basically either to contain Iran to a point where the people will overthrow the government, or they will react in a way that it would be virtually impossible for Iran to exist under these circumstances. All this political maneuvering is aimed at the other partners. I think Iran is well aware of this.
RT: The White House has been pushing hard to get this deal through, so that it can be approved in Congress. But lawmakers go on holiday on Saturday, meaning it could take two months before any deal is approved on Capitol Hill. How much of a disappointment would that be for Obama?
SSU: Frankly, I don’t know how a deal can be concluded. If a deal is to be concluded that means either Iran has subjugated itself and given up all its rights - which I don’t see happening - or the US will give into Iran to such a point that Congress would not accept it. I’m really not sure what they are playing at here, but I certainly don’t see a conclusion to this deal at all. So whether Congress goes away for sixty days or six months – it doesn’t matter – this deal as it stands with the demands being placed on Iran is impossible. And the Iranian people, after 36 years of fighting for their rights and their sovereignty and everything they’ve given up, they are not going to give to these demands. I don’t see how it possibly can work out.
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of RT.