Recently Joe Biden announced the “return of diplomacy”. At the same time, the bombing of Syria also returned.
The Biden-sanctioned raid targeted infrastructure in eastern Syria. They were used by pro-Iranian armed formations. In this way, Washington was supposed to show what price Iran would pay if it ordered an attack on US troops in an attempt to force the US back into a nuclear deal.
“But by bombing Syria for this reason, Biden proved that refusal to join the nuclear agreement endangers US national security – Iran’s nuclear program continues to develop as the US and Iran are getting closer to military confrontation”, – the article says.
Biden has previously spoken about his intention to return to the implementation of the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action on the Iranian nuclear program. But there is a huge difference between good intentions and constructive action, the newspaper writes. Instead of bringing back diplomacy, the new US president is bringing back old methods of aggression and pressure. Diplomacy in such conditions is nothing more than a slogan adorning the policy of coercion.
Although the revival of the JCPOA was hardly considered an easy task, this does not justify the methods of Biden, who spared no criticism of the destructive steps of his predecessor. The democrat unnecessarily created a split line over whether Iran or the United States should take the first step towards reviving the nuclear deal. It would be wiser to start coordinating actions with the European members of the agreement.
“Even if Biden believed that a small public confrontation could serve the broader goals of the administration, it should not be related to an issue on which the United States does not have a compelling moral or legal argument”, – the newspaper said.
Moreover, Biden initiated a highly counterproductive blame game that only damaged the atmosphere of diplomacy. The attempt to accuse Iran of non-compliance with the terms of the JCPOA was technically incorrect, as were the statements that the future of the deal depends precisely on Tehran’s actions.
“Although it was the US withdrew from the deal, while Iran is still in it”, – writes The Guardian.
“Iran has reduced its obligations under paragraph 36 of the JCPOA, but this is fundamentally different from the US withdrawal from the deal and the imposition of sanctions on countries that seek to comply with the nuclear agreement”.
And even if Washington does manage to successfully shift the blame onto Iran, there is no value in this now. But, in this way, the States demonstrate their insincerity and even malice.
“This is how Biden’s maneuvering was perceived in Tehran. If Biden believes that military signals in Syria and accusations in the media are good, although it sabotages the last opportunity to revive an agreement that is critical to US national security, he may unintentionally achieve what Trump was unable to do”.