LENDMAN on Iran Uranium enrichment, Russia’s Nord Stream 2

How Will US and Israel Respond to Increased Iranian Uranium Enrichment?

[dropcap]U[/dropcap]nder JCPOA provisions, Iran may enrich uranium to a 3.67% level – enough for commercial power and research, well below the 90% level needed to produce nuclear weapons.

Pre-JCPOA, Iran enriched uranium to a 20% level. It’s prepared to return to that level if Britain, France and Germany observe illegally imposed US sanctions.

While claiming their intention to stick to JCPOA terms, follow-up action hasn’t so far hasn’t been forthcoming. Most often Brussels observes US demands – even when harming the interests of EU member nations.

Will this time be different? Past history isn’t encouraging, Europe most often acting as an appendage of America’s imperial agenda.

In Monday remarks, Iranian Ayatollah Seyed Ali Kmanenei said the Atomic Energy Organization of Iran (AEOI) will prepare for enriching uranium to level of 190,000 SWU without delay – remaining within the JCPOA’s framework for now.

According to AEOI spokesman Behrouz Kamalvandi, “(i)n a letter that will be handed over to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA)…Iran will announce that the process of increasing the capacity to produce…UF6 (uranium hexafluoride)” – what’s needed to produce centrifuges.

Under JCPOA provisions, advanced ones aren’t permitted – able to enrich uranium 20 times faster than Iran’s current rate.

“We should accelerate some process(es)…linked to our nuclear work capacity to move forward faster in case needed,” Kamalvandi added.

As of now, Iran intends fulfilling its JCPOA obligations as it’s done since agreeing to its provisions, while preparing to resume pre-nuclear deal enrichment and related activities if the agreement falls apart for failure of Britain, France and Germany to adhere to their commitment – unclear but what’s likely unless proved otherwise.

How will Washington and Israel react if things turn out this way? Is joint military action an option? Is it likely – striking Iranian nuclear facilities despite no Islamic Republic atomic weapons program or intention to have one?

Would Trump order an attack on Iran’s nuclear facilities – perhaps in part to let DPRK leader Kim Jong-un know US military action will follow if summit and subsequent talks don’t produce results his regime wants.

He and Netanyahu are militantly hostile to Iran. So are hardliners surrounding them – maintaining the fiction of an Iranian threat, a nation that hasn’t attacked another one in centuries, not about to now except in self-defense if attacked.

Meeting with Germany’s Angela Merkel on Monday, Netanyahu maliciously claimed Iran intends waging religious war in Syria, wanting a foothold in the country to attack Israel – bald-faced lies, adding:

“Iran calls for our destruction but it’s also seeking nuclear weapons to carry out its genocidal designs” – more bald-faced lies!

Netanyahu is a notorious serial liar. Despite their normal relations with Israel, leaders of other nations know nothing he says is credible – notably about Iran, Syria, Hamas, Gazans and other Palestinians.

Iran is the region’s leading advocate for peace, stability, and elimination of nuclear weapons entirely. Israel and America threaten everyone everywhere – despite having no enemies except invented ones.

Looking ahead, regimes running both countries risk greater regional aggression than what’s already raging. 

Stepping back from the brink responsibly to restore peace and stability in Syria, Iraq, Yemen, Libya, Occupied Palestine, and elsewhere is considered anathema to US and Israeli hardliners.

Most likely, greater conflict lies ahead – maybe full-scale US-led war on Syria and attacking Iranian nuclear facilities, risking something far more serious than what’s now going on.

Russia’s Nord Stream 2 Pipeline Project

by Stephen Lendman (stephenlendman.org – Home – Stephen Lendman)

[dropcap]N[/dropcap]ord Stream 2 is an impressive project. When completed, it’ll be the world’s longest underwater pipeline, a major engineering achievement.

It’ll be able to deliver 55 billion cubic meters of natural gas from beneath the Baltic Sea, its capacity to be doubled by an additional line, the project scheduled for completion by late 2019 or early 2020.

According to the Nord Stream 2 web site, it’ll “transport natural gas into the European Union to enhance security of supply, support climate goals and strengthen the internal energy market.”

Russia’s huge natural gas reserves and proximity to other European countries makes it “a natural partner for a new transportation route…”

It’ll run from Russia’s border, below the Baltic Sea to Germany, crossing Russian and German waters, along with economic zones of Russia, Finland, Sweden, Denmark and Germany.

Five European companies are involved in construction – including France’s Engie, Austria’s OMV AG, Germany’s Uniper and Wintershall, along with Royal Dutch Shell. Brussels, including economic powerhouse Germany, strongly support the project. 

The Trump regime lied claiming it’ll undermine European energy security and stability. Polar opposite is true. It’ll be an economic and energy boon for countries benefitting from the pipeline.

According to Gazprom Export head Elena Burmistrova, European consumers will save at least 7.9 billion euros in annual energy costs – beginning in 2020.

As liquified natural gas (LNG) demand grows, savings could exceed 24 billion euros – a lucrative market for energy supplier Russia, a boon for European energy consumers. 

Trump regime Russophobes want America replacing Moscow as Europe’s main energy supplier, despite an ocean separating both continents, making it advantageous for EU countries to rely heavily on Russia for their LNG needs – impractical and expensive to ship it from the US.

Reportedly the Trump regime intends going all-out to undermine the project, planning to impose sanctions on European companies named above – involved in Nord Stream 2 construction.

State Department spokeswoman Heather Nauert earlier threatened EU companies involved in the project, saying:

“(W)e have spent a lot of time speaking with our partners and allies overseas to explain to them the ramifications of CAATSA (the Countering America’s Adversaries Through Sanctions Act).”

“And how an individual or a company or a country can run afoul against CAATSA and fall into sanctions.”

“We don’t tend to comment on sanctions actions, but we’ve been clear that firm steps against the Russian energy export pipeline sector could – if they engage in that kind of business – expose themselves to sanctions under CAATSA.”

Former German Foreign Minister, current Vice Chancellor Sigmar Gabriel denounced CAATSA, saying Berlin rejects US attempts to “push Russian gas from the European market” to sell its own.

Will tough EU talk be followed by Brussels bowing to Washington’s demands? Will European companies involved in Nord Stream 2 have second thoughts and pull out to avoid US sanctions?

Will Washington bully Europe into submitting to its interests on Nord Stream and the JCPOA? Will Brussels yield to Trump instead of pursuing what’s most beneficial to EU countries.

If past is prologue, things aren’t encouraging.