[ad_1]
The New York Times revealed that the president of the United States, Donald Trump, whose term ends in more than two months, last week surveyed several of his advisers and senior officials about the possibility of “taking action” in a few weeks against a site. Iranian nuclear.
She wrote that during a meeting chaired Thursday in the Oval Office, Trump asked his attendees, including Vice President Mike Pence, Secretary of State Mike Pompeo, Acting Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller and Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, the General Mark Milley, “if they have any option to act against” this nuclear site “in the next few weeks.”
He added that these high-ranking officials “convinced the president not to go ahead with a military attack” against Tehran, fearing it would lead to a full-scale conflict.
The New York newspaper confirmed that Trump posed this question to his aides the day after a report from the International Atomic Energy Agency, stating that Tehran continues to accumulate enriched uranium and that the amount of low-enriched uranium now available has exceeded 12 times the allowed limit. for the nuclear deal.
He indicated that the site Trump wanted to attack was likely the Natanz nuclear facility in the center of the Islamic Republic.
Relations between the United States and Iran severed four decades ago witnessed an increase in the level of tension since Trump assumed his presidential functions in 2017, then withdrew from the agreement on the Iranian nuclear program in the following year and reimposed severe sanctions on Tehran, which led to the assassination of the “Quds Force” commander in the Revolutionary Guard. Iranian General Qassem Soleimani in a US airstrike in Baghdad earlier this year.
The president-elect of the United States, Joe Biden, whom Trump has not yet admitted defeat to him, expressed his intention to “change the course” adopted by the Trump administration towards Iran, but the margin he has to achieve a breach Diplomacy with the Islamic Republic will be close and governed by various factors and obstacles.
The main turning point in the United States’ relationship with Iran under Trump was its decision in 2018 to unilaterally withdraw from the deal on the Iranian nuclear program, which was concluded between Tehran and major powers in 2015.
The US president re-imposed harsh sanctions on Tehran as part of a “maximum pressure” policy against him, which had a negative impact on the Iranian economy and the exchange rate of the local currency.
After nearly a year of the US withdrawal, Iran withdrew from some of the commitments that were included in the nuclear deal.
Trump considered that the agreement concluded during the reign of his predecessor, Barack Obama, was not enough and sought to pressure the Islamic Republic to reach a “better agreement” from his point of view. Iran rejected any new negotiations, emphasizing that it would continue to “resist” the sanctions and pressure.
Israel: Iran has to worry
Commenting on what was published by the “New York Times”, Israeli Energy Minister Yuval Steinitz said that Iran should be concerned about the news received about Trump’s request to develop options regarding attacking a nuclear site in Iran.
“Iranians should not feel comfortable,” he noted. “If I were Iranian, I would not feel comfortable after the report,” he told Israeli army radio, adding that he was not aware of the White House deliberations.
He said: “It is very important for the Iranians to know that if they suddenly rush to high levels of enrichment, towards nuclear weapons, they may face the military might of the United States and perhaps other countries as well.”
Iran threatens “crushing response”
In response to a question about the US newspaper report, Iranian government spokesman Ali Rabiei repeated during a press conference his country’s position warning of any targets.
He said: “Our short answer has always been that any movement against the people of Iran will face an overwhelming response.” He added: “There may be attempts (to attack Iran),” adding: “However, in my personal opinion and not as a government spokesman … personally, I do not expect such a thing. It is likely that they (the Americans) do not want to increase instability in the world and the region. “
