Insight: Iran sanctions deal sparks hunt for vintage plane parts

Comments (6)
TomMariner wrote:

I truly hope the Administration’s strategy toward Iran’s nuclear ambitions works. But why should they comply? It looks like we have immediately lifted all meaningful sanctions and not one centrifuge has slowed down. And not even set a start of the “six months” when they sort of, maybe, say they might sit down for more talks.

My bet is the date for the Iranians to ignore the next meeting will be just after the 2014 election, just like the next pain from Obamacare.

By that time, the Iranians will have hundreds of new passenger and war planes on order, using their new oil wealth.

But maybe, just maybe the leaders will decide it is better to be a member of the international community as an ordinary country.

Nov 28, 2013 12:07pm EST  --  Report as abuse
westernshame wrote:

@ Tom Mariner

all meaningful sanctions have not been lifted, the US and EU are maintaining the vast majority of their sanctions. in fact i’d say the opposite, very few sanctions have been lifted.

Nov 28, 2013 1:46pm EST  --  Report as abuse
seymourfrogs wrote:

Therefore, another country where there some good old fashioned engineers will evolve.
A thing of the past in most consumer societies, to their detriment.

Nov 28, 2013 3:59pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Arnleif wrote:

@TomMariner

What does it mean to “be a member of the international community”?

Following US orders?

Now I do not hope you try to point at western accusations that suspect Iran for violating the NPT. While it is true that Iran enrich uranium which they have as much right to do as any other state. It is also true that Iran do comply with all obligatory inspection routines required by IAEA.

However when states like the US through the security council asks for additional and non obligatory inspections because they suspect Iran to build nuclear weapons, then they get that because the US is the most powerful nation in the world.

The US usually gets what it wants. And it is these inspections that literary call Iran to lay flat on the floor, allowing inspectors to roam freely. No country would accept that.

True there is an UN security resolution calling for Iran to halt enrichment, and that is based on the lack of ability to track enrichment that supposedly takes place beyond non obligatory inspections. So if the problem was that IAEA can not track all uranium enrichment in Iran, then of course this should apply to all states that have signed the NPT.

So let us start with the worst violator of the NPT agreement, The United States of America. Each year the Government Accountability Office and the US Energy Department give out reports that are public. These reports clearly show that several tons of weapongraded nuclear material can not be accounted for. Meaning material that can produce dozens of nuclear weapons can not be tracked and reported to the IAEA. To compare this to Iran which supposedly may or may not have enough, in some unpredictable future to perhaps make a bomb, is quite ridiculous.

So why do not the IAEA react to this? Well that has to do with how and by who the IAEA is created and structured. IAEA on its own can not demand anything of any state. A member state of the IAEA have to address this through the UN security council. So what do you think would happen to a state accusing the US of violating the NPT in the UN security council?

Nov 28, 2013 4:28pm EST  --  Report as abuse
Dr_Steve wrote:

What they ought to lift is the Cuban embargo. I could go for some Havana cigars.

Nov 28, 2013 6:45pm EST  --  Report as abuse
AHRZ wrote:

I dont understand the justification of putting sanctions on a nations airline.
the military sanctions i fully understand why they are imposed.
but civilian passenger aircraft ? it goes against everything the Western World represents. why sanction something that costs the lives of many innocent civilians. the sanctions on airlines and passenger aircraft and unfair and against IATA Chicago convention

Nov 29, 2013 9:30am EST  --  Report as abuse
This discussion is now closed. We welcome comments on our articles for a limited period after their publication.