LyrArc Article Gist
DJT moves ahead with a decision to stop Iran from getting nuclear weapons by bombing nuclear sites ar Fordow and other sites that were hard to reach.

LyrArc Article Gist
Raul Castro of Cuba indicted by the US Justice Department May 20, 2026 for Cuban Americans killed when civilian flights helping Cuban refugees in the waters near Cuba were shot on orders from Raul Castro, as minister of defense. Only towards the end of this news report by Perry Stein and Karen De Young of the Washington Post is it clear that this indictment is on Cuba Independence Day March 20, which in 1902 marks the setup of the Republic of Cuba, at the end of the US military takeover of Cuba from the Spanish during the Spanish American War. Cuba under Castro does not use this day but the day of the Communist takeover in 1959 of January 1, and celebrates as Day of the Revolution, July 26, the day when the attack on the Moncada military barracks started the Revolution against the dictatorship of Fulgencio Batista. Only the Obama administration similar to its failures in addressing the Iran nuclear weapons crisis refused to recognize 1902 date as the Cuban Independence Day, all other administrations before did. Under the Monroe Doctrine of 1824 the US clearly considered Latin America as its neighborhood and would not accept any foreign power in its neighborhood, making the Platt amendment attached to the Cuban 1902 Constitution permitting US intervention simply an addition. That the Monroe Doctrine was proven right in 2 ways is not mentioned by the Washington Post or by the elite media. What it did was to prevent European colonial powers from intervening and restoring colonial type rule to Spanish colonies in Latin America. It was welcomed by the British as it had no such designs, objected to by the Spanish Dutch and the French who had such designs for their colonial Empires. It was resented by Cubans naturally but Cubans did not consider that US is the only power who even when it pushed the Spaniards out of Cuba and Philippines in the Spanish American War of 1900 after centuries of Spanish occupation, the only power who prepared Cuba for Independence within 4 years in 1898. Which European colonial power could do this? The other reason for the Monroe Doctrine is in the Platt Amendment attached to the Cuban Constitution which committed the Cuban government to implement and maintain programs the US introduced to control yellow fever and infectious diseases. In 1934 FDR removed the Platt Amendment under a "Good Neighbor Policy. It is the relaxation of the Monroe Doctrine by future American adminstrations that has brought so much suffering and pain to North America, for the US and Mexico with illegal immigration and drugs, corrupting governance in Mexico and creating social political strife in the US, more deaths from drugs than the Vietnam, Korean and WWI combined. Today's Cuba's economy and the Venezuelan economy that copied Cuba's example has completely collapsed, one fourth of the people left the country taking with them the vitally important skills, and leading to economic hardships for the people. This would not have happened if the Monroe Doctrine implemented under the Good Neighbor ideas of FDR and the Alliance for Progress of JFK was kept in place. This shows that Cuba's Independence happened when the Americans supported Cuban rebels fighting for independence in 1898 just as the Indian Independence was won in 1947 from the British under Labour's PM Clement Attlee in 1945 taking action. Four years of American rule in Cuba to prepare it for independence as a transition is far better than 4 centuries of Spanish rule, and 2 years of British rule as a transition 1945-1947 under Attlee (who replaced Churchill in 1945 and setup the NHS) is better than 2 centuries of British colonial rule. In this sense America is with the Cuban people, just as the average British public and working class is with the Indian people.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
One of the side effects of the Ukraine war is the gradually improving relations between the US and Iran. The US released some funds to Iran that were frozen. Here Iran responds by slowing down its buildup of near weapons grade nuclear fuel. In this way president Biden has tackled the difficult problem of Iran's nuclear program in a low profile way, one of the achievements of the Biden administration's foreign policy.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report by Peter Baker shows President Trump only reluctantly agreed to certify the Iran Nuclear Agreement. He opposed it in discussions with the Secretary of State Tillerson. It took the combined effort of Tillerson Dunford of the combined chiefs of staff, Defense Secretary Mattis, and of National Security Adviser McMaster, to get Trump to agree to go ahead with the deal. President Trump wanted a new strategy to counter Iran in the Middle East. The Iranian foreign minister Zarif has not yet met with Tillerson of the U.S. Zarif says Iran may withdraw from the deal if there is significant nonperformance by the U.S. Trump advisers are wary about the influence on Europe as the EU is not interested in taking a new look at the Iran nuclear deal. The EU sees things differently- that the issues of Iranian influence in the war torn Middle East is a separate issue from the nuclear deal, and that in any case a nuclear constrained Iran is better than one with nuclear weapons. Another factor is that the Middle East is now a complicated place with relations crisscrossing in different and even conflicting directions. The U.S. played a part on the Iranian side in the retaking of Mosul in Iraq with U.S. bombing strikes against Islamic State. In Iraq the U.S. is supporting the Abadi government which is mainly Shiite in its structure and is supported by Iran. The Trump position is that president Obama gave away too much in negotiating the deal and was not against the negotiating process.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Trump announces the U.S. withdrawal from the Iran Nuclear Agreement of 2015 signed by president Obama. He calls it a bad deal and "a one sided agreement, that "didn't bring, calm, didn't bring peace, and never will." Since the signing of the agreement the conflicts in the Middle East have increased and relations between the U.S. and Iran have deteriorated under the Trump administration. During the election campaign candidate Trump and Republicans had criticized the deal and deal never gained Republican support. It was also not initially supported by France which called for stronger safeguards on nuclear weapons development. The appointment of John Bolton as National Security Adviser, and Mike Pompeo as the new Secretary of State, who were strong critics of the Iran nuclear deal also influenced president Trump. He was also influenced say aides by the success of his policy with North Korea of imposing strong bargaining pressure with tough sanctions on North Korea including Chinese sanctions, which led to the talks between North and South Korean presidents and the planned Trump meeting with Kim Jong-Un of North Korea. Iran's president Rouhani says Iran will stay with the agreement as the EU countries Germany, France plan to support the agreement. This could also leave an opening for future talks with Iran on a new peace agreement as  president Trump talked about Iranian people deserving a better deal at the end of his 11 minute announcement. As Stephens points out in a op-ed in the NYT Iran's economy needs the removal of sanctions so that focus could shift to economic development, as the lifting of sanctions have yet to result in increasing living standards and building infrastructure neglected during the sanctions years. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Israeli attack on Iranian nuclear facilities June 12, 2025, after an impasse in US negotiations with Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
US Naval Blockade Day 10- US stock markets up 4.1% for 4 months, oil price $95 a barrel, prices at pump $4.02 down from $3.94 a month back. If all the US seeks out of an agreement is getting nuclear material out of Iran to keep nuclear weapons out of the Middle East based on 5 decades of war in the Middle East- Afghanistan, Syria, Iraq, and now Iraq/ Lebanon- this is to protect the people of the world from nuclear weapons, including China, India, Brazil, Russia, EU and other nations. This was the goal of Democratic administrations also, only the Republican approach is to err on the side of safe and take zero chances on future nuclear escalation while the Democratic administrations were based on trust, trust which is not a sure thing in the Middle East political and cultural environment. Some of DJT comments were bluster, but the basic position is the same- against nuclear proliferation for a safer planet. In this light the Naval Blockade only seeks not to block Iran's path to a prosperous economy and a bright future for its people. Iran's economy is affected in the same way that India's and China's, Africa's is affected, for upwards of 4 billion people compared to 100 million for Iran. Africa, Pakistan and Bangladesh, Indonesia, among the poorest in the world, poorer by far than Iran. The economic impact on this part of the world is not part of Iranian perceptions. The economic impact on Gulf kingdoms an adversary of Iran is by comparison only a small fraction of the impact on the poorest countries. In this situation US is working to support the poorest segments of the Chinese people ( the part of China in the hinterland that is the one third not urbanized) and the Indian people through its cooperation and direct or indirect support. In this perspective the US economy stands as a steadfast support for US policy of fairness and respect for all nations since 1900- US is not one of the colonial powers such as Britain and France who created some of the artificial states Syria, Iraq, out of the remains of the collapsed Ottoman Empire in the interest of their Empires by 1921, and setup regimes in Iran for its oil, that are the source of today's problems and wars. No Empire of Britain and France promised Iran $28 billion as this Nation does today if Iran ships nuclear material out of Iran for a 100 percent shift to a peaceful Middle East that works for the modernization and industrial development of its economies in the interests of the people. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Under the outlines of the nuclear agreement being reached with Iran in April 2015, Iran gets to keep all its nuclear facilities intact, and makes the concession of mothballing most of its centrifuges. The questions relate to Iranian intentions and monitoring of compliance with the agreement.

LyrArc Article Gist
There appears to be a split in the Iranian leadership about whether Iran should forge ahead with the development of nuclear weapons. National Intelligence Estimate findings, show that economic difficulties resulting from international sanctions may be causing some of the Iranian leadership to question the value of forging ahead with the nuclear weapons program. Iran cut subsidies sharply for fuel, electricity, and food in December 2010.

LyrArc Article Gist
"All I want is freedom for the people,” DJT says said in a phone interview with the Washington Post at around 4 a.m.“I want a safe nation, and that’s what we’re going to have." The nuclear threat from Iran has been the subject of negotiations for years with no tangible results. This nuclear weapons development has led to sanctions and shortages in the economy of Iran with the situation deteriorating and protests in Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
The nuclear deal reached in the 2013 Geneva negotiations between Iran and the EU, U.S., Russia, France, Germany, UK and China, a diplomatic bloc named the P5+1. Iran gets sanctions relief that would bring in an additional $6-7 billion dollars. In return Iran agrees to increased International Atomic Energy Agency inspections of the heavy water reactor in Arak, to not start the facility or lead it with nuclear fuel. Earlier France had pushed for a complete dismantling of that reactor. Iran will cap its uranium enrichment to levels needed only for fuel in a reactor, of 3.5%-5%, and maintain its total low enriched nuclear fuel at the current level of about 6 tons for the six month period in which further negotiations will take place. As the EU representative put it, this provides the time and space to reach a serious deal. It does not ship out and destroy the estimated 19,000 centrifuge machines in Iran to produce nuclear fuel. A sticking point was Iran's insistence that it has a right to develop and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, which Iran says is part of the UN Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty....

LyrArc Article Gist
The minimum non-negotiable "breakout window" for 2015 nuclear negotiations of the EU, the U.S. and other nations with Iran, is a period of 12 months. The term "breakout window" refers to the period in which Iran decides to breakout of a signed nuclear agreement and rushes to develop nuclear weapons. It should take at least 12 months for Iran to be able to develop a weapon so that there is time to develop an effective response to the threat to world peace.

LyrArc Article Gist
France's foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, has sounded a warning about a nuclear agreement with Iran in the past. In 2013 he warned the West not to get drawn into a "fools game." In an intervew with the WSJ on May 31, 2015, he says without proper verification which includes military sites a nuclear agreement with Iran is meaningless. He points to the dangers of other countries in the region saying the agreement lacks clout and opting for developing nuclear weapons.

LyrArc Article Gist
In efforts to get Iran to end its uranium enrichment program a package of incentives includes full involvement in Iran's oil and gas industry, and full integration into organizations like the WTO. It includes offering state of the art light water reactor technologies for electricity generation, and a substantive package of nuclear R&D cooperation. This is a set of terms offered by the US and European partners as a combination and presented to Iran by the EU's foreign policy chief Javier Solana. Iranian negotiator Ali Larijani stated in response that Iran was ready to enter a another round of talks to reach a balanced conclusion and Bush called it a positive response. Robert Einhorn, a proliferation expert at the Center for Strategic and International Studies, argues that the main issues for Iran are prestige and security. And the only way the U.S. can address this he said is for the Bush administration to restore normalized relations with Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
Iraq created from the Ottoman Empire by the British and French now has Shia militant groups next to Sunni groups in the army and Kurdish militia in a artificial state. This is key to grasping the situation in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Arab regions with Shia population that were parts of the Ottoman Empire for 5 centuries since 1500. When Sunnis dominated in the 1980's Shia were suppressed and responded by joining Iran supported Shia militia across the region. When the Shia militant groups took over with US forces running Iraq, Islamic State was formed from anti-Shia Sunni groups. After Islamic State was suppressed by US a fragile truce remains between Iranian militant groups, Iraqi Sunnis in the army, and Kurdish groups. This time the US cannot be naive about the different interests in nations created artificially to suit their colonial empires by the British and French out of the ruins of the Ottoman Empire after World War I by 1921- it is important for the US to not get involved in the region except to prevent nuclear weapons development and ballistic missile development that would endanger world peace, and get worldwide backing and support, and limit its involvement specific to its carefully made goals that are matched by US strengths. This is a serious matter as US has important goals in its own western hemisphere which require America's full attention including with the Monroe Doctrine in its modern form- the Bush/Obama policies were a disaster for America and bad policy that created the conditions for lack of attention as drug states began to form in the western hemisphere and for illegal immigrants and drugs to enter through its southern land border with Mexico fraying America's social and economic fabric. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The WSJ's Laurence Norman talks to Yukiya Amano, head of the UN agency, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), which has the responsibility of verification and inspection of Iran's nuclear development and facilities. Amano describes the issues raised by a 2011 report which outlined 12 sets of concerns to which Iran has to explain, a condition included in the final nuclear agreement. Iran has to respond by mid-August, IAEA then responds, and does work in Sept and Oct, and submits its report by Dec. 2015. Yamano says he has to fill in all the missing pieces in this jigsaw puzzle to get a full picture of Iran's nuclear development. Iran has denied access to military sites and Mr. Amano couldn't say if he has access to the Parchin military site. A concession that was made in the agreement is the long interval of three weeks before access to a particular site that arouses suspicions-the agreement gives Iran the right to appeal an IAEA request to visit such a site to a special commission. The U.S. and its European allies have a majority on the commission yet three weeks are allowed in which Iran could move material to some other location. For critics the question will be why such a concession was needed if Iran truly has decided not to develop nuclear weapons technologies. The U.S. president's response at a news conference on July 15, 2015, was that with the laws of physics the U.S. monitoring tools would detect nuclear activity at that site. The agreement also gives Iran an earlier than planned lifting of a ban on sales of arms and missiles and missile parts if the IAEA says Iran's nuclear activities are peaceful. Iran could conceivably wait till the ban is lifted and its economy in a much stronger position to withstand any future limited sanctions to pursue nuclear weapons development. This would have delayed development for a few years during which time the hope is that Iran has changed into a more peaceful nation pursuing economic development in its region, yet even if this is the case as as happened with India and Pakistan it could still pursue nuclear weapons development. The alternative is a status quo till a better agreement is reached with the leverage of tight economic sanctions and continuing dialogue during which time Iran continues to get closer to a nuclear weapon, or the use of force to prevent this. Iran added the arms embargo issue during the last weeks of the negotiation in June, a controversial move on Iran's part, as this may have complicated the picture with ballistic missiles technology exports to Iran approved after 8 years in the final agreement, compared to the agreement reached in April 2015 which made no mention of the lifting of the arms embargo. Iran played on the notion that if Zarif returned to Iran without an agreement hardliners including Khamanei would veto any agreement, yet this could just be the Iranian negotiating strategy. U.S. president Obama stated at the July 15, 2015 news conference that it would be hard to hold sanctions for longer. Critics might argue that China was already benefitting from the small easing of sanctions by increasing Iranian oil imports by 30% in 2014, and would have less incentive to withdraw from sanctions, as it is dependent on the U.S. and the EU, major markets for its exports and access to technologies. A WSJ/NBC poll in July shows almost half of the people polled in the U.S. saying they do not know enough to express an opinion, a steady 36% support an agreement, showing that the public has not been educated and taken along during the different steps in the largely secret negotiations....

LyrArc Article Gist
A formal lifting of economic sanctions takes place in Jan 2016 with the implementation of the nuclear deal with Iran, a landmark event.

LyrArc Article Gist
Israel outlined its own proposals for a nuclear agreement on April 6, 2014. Israel's Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz, says any deal must include Iran cease all nuclear research and development activity, remove its enriched uranium stockpile from the country, reduce the number of centrifuges to below what was agreed to in the outline that emerged from talks with Iran in April 2015, closing of the underground facility at Fordow that was built clandestinely in the early 2000's. Steinitz said- "The deal has to be made on the assumption that Iran might violate it."

LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler on the Obama administration's view of the nuclear deal wih Iran at the Geneva talks in November 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
Experts at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace's Nuclear Policy Program describe what to look for and in what time frame in the 2012 negotiations between Iran and the U.S. and other European countries in Istanbul, Turkey over Iran's nuclear program.