
Iran Complies with Nuclear Deal; Sanctions Are Lifted - jseliger
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/01/17/world/middleeast/iran-sanctions-lifted-nuclear-deal.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=a-lede-package-region&region=top-news&WT.nav=top-news&_r=0
======
tyre
This is terrific news!

As with the tearing down of the Berlin Wall, opening up countries to the
world's economy and ideas is the first step towards democracy.

The implications of this are tremendous (not in order of importance):

1) Oil prices will continue to fall as Iran is able to supply the global
markets. Many oil states rely on money from natural resources to preserve
monarchies. Money for freedom only works so long as the money keeps flowing.

2) Our (US) reliance on Saudi Arabia will diminish as there are now two powers
in the region to work with. Having strong relations with both Shiite and Sunni
powers in the Middle East will likely reduce sectarian violence. We're light
years from being out of the woods, but this is big step in the right
direction.

3) The Iranian people will gain access to the world economy. From a human
rights perspective, they are the biggest winners here. As with Sunni/Shiite
relations, no doubt a long way to go (the Ayatollah is a tyrant,) but you
gotta celebrate the wins when you can.

4) De-escalation of our conflict with Iran. We saw it with Iraq, Vietnam, and
Korea. Invasion + nation building is sexy, but highly ineffective. Having one
less nuclear power that calls for our destruction is certainly a nice to have.

5) Shows Americans that diplomacy can work. Iranians don't hate Americans,
they hate what America represents. To them, we represent a superpower that
gives little to no thought of anyone else's sovereignty. We assassinated their
democratically elected leader and backed the Shah, which got us into this
mess. Diplomacy is far less sexy and easily criticized, but that's a huge part
of getting this deal done.

Note: Many of these are over-simplified. Nonetheless, this is a pretty big
deal and a cause for celebration.

~~~
toephu2
What's the deal with this whole push for democracy? (nevermind, checked your
company, I see your angle now). As if it's the holy grail of form of
governments? Yeah, democracy really turned India around..

Food for thought: Would you rather be an Indian living in India, or a Chinese
living in China?

~~~
jernfrost
Democracy might not be efficient but it is the best safeguard we have against
severe abuses. Look at China they might have benefited from their autocracy in
recent years, but they paid dearly for it during the cultural revolution.
India has been spared horrors like that exactly because they have been a
democracy.

Other than that I think the countries are too different to make any hard
conclusions. China has very strong traditions for effective administration
going thousands of years back. This has likely been of more profound
importance than dictatorship. Japan after the war managed to grow very rapidly
under democracy. So did Germany.

While economic development in India has always been difficult. Even during the
British dictatorship in India they had problems getting any kind of modern
business going.

I think India suffers from not really being a single country and from being
dam hot. It is harder to get stuff done under such heat. Productivity will
pick up there when aircondition becomes far more common.

Really I think India should be multiple countries. When you put together lots
of countries which are too different, you will get too many conflicts which
will make progress grind to a halt.

~~~
wutbrodo
India was about as poor as countries like South Korea immediately post world
war 2. The most massive difference was their embrace of a Soviet style planned
economy, which means that they grew at about 1-2% annually for the next 40
years and South Korea grew at a much, much higher rate. It's not a coincidence
that economic liberalization in India in the early 90s (as with china, 15
years earlier) coincided with a boom in growth rate.

I fully agree with your point that India ideally should be many, many
countries: democracy suffers greatly when a massive, linguistically,
religiously, and culturally diverse subcontinent is forced into a single
government. Just look at Europe and their cautious, precarious tiptoeing
towards political unity, despite having the relative advantage of being
infinitely less diverse, way less religious, and way more developed than the
Indian subcontinent.

------
bane
This an incredibly subtle deal.

\- Iran gets access to global markets, and in time tourism (there's an
incredible number of amazingly beautiful things in Iran for tourists to see,
from ancient to modern ski resorts)

\- Iranian oil will keep prices in the toilet, this is basically a way for the
U.S. to punish Saudi Arabia for decades of support for various maleficent
actors. Except it doesn't involve an invasion, a takeover, or anything else
beyond economic sabotage. The Saudis have also had decades to form a more
diverse economy, and for various reasons haven't managed to do it...this has
kept them vulnerable to this kind of action and it helps free the the major
users of Saudi oil from "vendor lock-in"

\- It demonstrates that cool, calm, collected diplomacy can actually work.
However, many people will forget that the U.S. and Iran have been fighting a
proxy war for decades. It hasn't been a hot war, but Stuxnet, various
revolutionary movements and so on have been bits of that war. This isn't just
Iran throwing in the towel because the sanctions finally worked, its because
all of the other major leverage points Iran could muster were defeated.

\- While the sanctions by themselves failed to work, they helped create a
political climate inside of Iran that favored this outcome instead of having
another go at saber rattling.

\- This helps provide a mildly more palatable "friend" in the region than
Pakistan

~~~
mschuster91
> \- Iranian oil will keep prices in the toilet, this is basically a way for
> the U.S. to punish Saudi Arabia for decades of support for various
> maleficent actors.

While I'd certainly support letting SA rot to pieces for their misdeeds, SA
alone could with a single move end the low oil prices. It's more like SA wants
to screw over both Russia and the US, because neither country can produce oil
at 10$ per barrel like SA can.

> It hasn't been a hot war, but Stuxnet, various revolutionary movements and
> so on have been bits of that war.

Stuxnet was Israeli with US cooperation, iirc. Not that this makes stuff any
better. Only problem is that Israel can and will ignore US opinions if they
feel threatened. Unfortunately, Israel is in possession of nuclear bombs and
their current government is extremely right-wing; I'm not sure if Israel won't
escalate the war to "really hot" now that a deal has passed and they will be
afraid that Iran will try to subvert it.

~~~
chadzawistowski
> Stuxnet was Israeli with US cooperation, iirc. Yes, and they targeted the
> Iranian computers that control their cetrifuges, to sabotage them.

------
salimmadjd
This is a tremendous news politically and economically.

Economics - 1 - the price of oil has been declining since the IranDeal was
signed. In US alone the annual savings as result of cheaper gas and cheaper
food (food production costs is strongly tied to gas prices) is about
$500B/year (from $4/gallon - $2/gallon). Basically providing additional $500B
in spending money in US. 2 - globally, the lower price of food and gas can
potentially provide additional spending money.

3 - Iran has crumbling infrastructure and need numerous foreign contractors to
rebuild (European and Chinese have already signed up). Sadly US companies will
not be able to participate.

4 - Iran has potential for a large consumer market.

Politically -

1 - US will finally have a second option (let's call it the second front) in
middle east. We in US have been keeping a blind eye toward Saudis, their
indirect financing of ISIS and all types of jihadist fighters in region from
Libya, Syria, Africa, Afghanistan, etc.

2 - Iran will be tapped into helping stabilize Afghanistan, Iraq and Syria
(there is already talks of providing and exist for Assad)

3 - Iran's gas can provide a hedge (at least the fear of an Iranian pipeline)
against Russia. This probably wont happen as Iran relies more on Russia than
Europe and will probably maintain that role, but that's a possibility.

4 - The open Iran is forced to further integrate globally. This has always
been the fear of the hardliners and it'll be resisted by some within, however,
there seem to be an understanding that stopping progress is a futile task.

5 - One of the largest women secondary eduction (close to 70% of college
students are women), it will eventually play out as a potential model for
other regional muslim countries to emulate.

6 - It will force Saudis to change. Saudis are extremely worried about the
IranDeal. But their biggest existential threat is not militarily, but
culturally. From having 70% women college students, to hybrid system of
government. Iran socioeconomic role, will put pressure internally on Saudi
rulers and it will force them make uncomfortable changes or face internal
turmoil.

~~~
jernfrost
Very interesting with the high number of women in college. In the long run I
think they will bury Saudi Arabia. Once oil runs out Saudi will have nothing
but Iran will have a much stronger foundation to build on.

They already got lots of industry like car manufacture.

------
gotchange
> Iran will use the roughly $100 billion in frozen assets it will receive to
> support terrorism and other misadventures.

> Iran’s support for terrorism, its imprisonment of dissidents and even some
> Americans, its meddling in Iraq and Syria and its arms trade.

Funny that Saudi Arabia is guilty of all the above if not 10X worse but not a
single word from those republicans. This speaks volumes of the power of the
Saudi lobby in the US political system and how their wealth could influence
decisions and policies in the US.

~~~
joezydeco
Except that allowing Iran to export even more oil keeps the price of crude
down on the floor. Saudi Arabia can't survive oil staying at $30 for the next
decade.

So maybe this is an end-run around the Saudis and letting things sort
themselves out naturally?

~~~
mapt
From what I understand? Saudi Arabia has plenty of money banked; They can
survive a decade without the sort of windfall profits they've enjoyed.

"SAMA's net foreign assets totaled $628 billion in November, down from a
record high of $737 billion in August 2014,"

The marginal price to produce a barrel of Saudi crude is still the lowest in
the world, at just three USD. What's going die out once the equipment is worn
out (or require extensive subsidy) are marginal plays in developed countries
like Canada, the US, and the North Sea, the Arctic, the deep offshore
drilling, tight or heavy oil, tar sands, tar shales, smaller fields without
economies of scale, and all forms of biodiesel & ethanol (yes, even the most
efficient, Brazilian ethanol).

All the oil-dependent economies are going to suffer and compensate monetarily,
by drawing down sovereign wealth or cutting expenditures, but the harder bound
is the level at which it makes economic sense to stop drilling. Production
prices in the above settings are high enough that they just can't make money
at $30/barrel, which is a whole other category of problem than not making
enough money to feed the government budget which has ballooned only in the
last decade taking advantage of higher prices.

[http://knoema.com/vyronoe/cost-of-oil-production-by-
country](http://knoema.com/vyronoe/cost-of-oil-production-by-country)

~~~
joezydeco
Saudi oil revenue has already sunk below government expenditures[1]. The just-
announced 2016 budget has a deficit of $87 billion[2]. That's 7 years to go
until the reserves are gone.

And how much does the House of Saud hand out to its citizens to keep things
calm and orderly? What happens when that money starts to dry up?

[1] [http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-saudi-budget-expected-to-
be-...](http://www.wsj.com/articles/new-saudi-budget-expected-to-be-squeezed-
by-low-oil-prices-1450915313)

[2] [http://english.alarabiya.net/en/special-reports/saudi-
budget...](http://english.alarabiya.net/en/special-reports/saudi-
budget-2016/2015/12/28/Saudi-Arabia-to-unveil-2016-budget.html)

~~~
mapt
They bleed out savings while slowly ramping back down to the vicinity of the
levels that they handed out 15 years ago.

This is a traumatic process, sure - but it's not like they were uncomfortably
poor 15 years ago, and they (unlike some others, I'm looking at you Venezuela)
have plenty of buffer with which to keep their populations comfortable until a
few years after their rivals stop drilling.

~~~
moistgorilla
Going from rich to poor is significantly harder than staying poor.

~~~
mapt
All they need to do is outlast maybe 20% of the rest of the oil producers,
enough to raise prices back up.

------
msoad
One very welcome change is reconnection of SWIFT network to Iran. You can't
believe how hard it is right now to send money to Iran. This hit me when I had
to transfer money to my family in their extremely hard times, when my brother
had an accident and needed cash for treatments.

I hope this trend continues and Iran comes back to the international scene.
It's good for everyone. Iran is very similar to Israel. Most of people are
normal but there is a small percentage of extremist who have a lot of voice.
Lucky for Israel they have a better constitution and governance model.

~~~
kobayashi
Israel and Iran are far from alike. It's likely true that Iranians are, to our
best knowledge, some of the most reasonable and liberal-minded in the Middle
East, but Israel does not simply have a "better constitution and governance
model". In Iran, the extremists are running the place, and are a large segment
of society. In Israel, extremists are marginalized, and even the degree of
their extremism is less than that of the Iranian leadership.

I am less welcoming of the news that Iran will be reconnected to SWIFT, as I
think that the real good news would be the downfall of the Mullahs and the
rise of a representative, reasonable Iranian government, in peace with its
neighbours and its own citizens.

~~~
msoad
It's proven (North Korea) that crippling a country's economy does not lead to
downfall of its government. I wish it was that simple though!

~~~
kobayashi
One country (DPRK) does not make a rule. An besides, the DPRK and the Islamic
Republic of Iran are very different regimes with very different citizenry.
Iranians, by and large, do not believe in a death cult of personality
surrounding their leaders, and can be much more critical of governmental
choices.

~~~
subway
Cuba? Burma? Syria?

~~~
ashark
Iraq, for that matter. They suffered under severe sanctions _and a no-fly
zone_ that left part of the country beyond the control of the state for over a
decade and Saddam was nowhere near being overthrown until the US and allies
actually invaded (again).

------
1024core
I don't know why we're so ensconced in Saudi arms. Iran is much more liberal
than Saudi Arabia; and Iran doesn't export the fundamentalist interpretation
of Islam (Wahabbism) which is causing headaches all over the world.

Now I'll sit back and wait for the "but... but... Iran said they would wipe
Israel off the map!!!1!" crowd.

~~~
lingben
This is such an ignorant statement that it is difficult to decide how exactly
to unpack it. As an Iranian let me attempt to do so anyway:

First, Iran is Shia, not Sunni. So, no, they are not Wahabi. Just like the
Queen of England is not Catholic but rather Anglican (Protestant).

Second, it is arguable whether Iran is more liberal than Saudi Arabia. In some
instances it is. In others it is not. This is a matter of religious debate.
Just like Saudi Arabia, as a Muslim, you can not simply stop being a Muslim or
convert to another religion or become an atheist.

Iran also has consistently persecuted non-Shia Muslims (including Sunnis,
Sufis, Ahmadiys, etc.) as well as the Bahais who are the largest religious
minority in Iran.

The reality is that Iran implements Sharia just like Saudi Arabia. They chop
off hands, blind people, hang people in public hangings off cranes, etc. The
Iranian version of Sharia is a little different than that of Saudi Arabia.
This is because they are Shia and have a different version of Islam, not
because they are full of sugar and spice and everything nice.

Third, Iran certainly does exports their version of Islam just like Saudi
Arabia. The most obvious one right now is Yemen where the Houthis are being
used by Iran as a proxy to fight Saudi Arabia.

But Iran has also funded Shia Muslims in Nigeria [1] and elsewhere in Africa.
They also created and continue to fund Hizbollah to the tune of hundreds of
millions of dollars a year as well as shiploads of weapons and explosives
which Hizbollah uses as a terrorist organization to perpetrate untold
atrocities.

Iran has also perpetrated many acts of aggression and terrorism globally:
Kenya, Thailand, Argentina (AMIA bombing), Paraguay, etc. [2]

[1] [http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/23/nigeria-
s-k...](http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2015/12/23/nigeria-s-khomeini-
spreading-iran-s-revolution-to-africa.html) [2]
[http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianoce...](http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/kenya/10033351/Iranians-
guilty-of-Kenya-bomb-plot.html) [2] for more complete list, see:
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-
sponsored_terro...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_state-
sponsored_terrorism)

It is only as a consequence of a wholesale ignorance of the reality of the
Iranian regime, its government's motivating philosophy, and its brutal
autocratic and dictatorial grip on power that someone could say what you've
just said.

If this comes across as a sharp response it is because I'm tired of people
giving Iran a pass by way of a false comparison to Saudi Arabia and/or
misunderstanding or not taking the time in the first place to inform
themselves about the realities of the current regime.

As an Iranian who has had family members and friends of my family imprisoned
on trumped up charges, tortured and killed and their property seized (to then
be charged for the bullet that killed them) it is unconscionable to give such
a blood soaked regime a pass of any kind.[3]

[3]
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_fee](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bullet_fee)

~~~
bronz
You seem to know a lot about Iranian politics, would you recommend something
to read to bring an American up to speed on Iranian culture and politics both
domestic and international?

~~~
lingben
It depends what you want to learn about specifically.

For a general introduction there is an excellent 3 part BBC documentary "Iran
and the West":

[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_the_West](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Iran_and_the_West)

If you want an inside account of things from a 'Prince': "Blood and Oil::
Memoirs of a Persian Prince"

For fascinating insight into Iran's geopolitics, economics and the context of
the 1979 revolution (with major implications for the current global oil
market) consider Andrew Scott Cooper's excellent book: The Oil Kings

here's an article from 2014 by Cooper to whet your appetite:
[http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/12/18/why-would-the-saudis-
cra...](http://foreignpolicy.com/2014/12/18/why-would-the-saudis-crash-oil-
markets-iran/)

and here's quite a good interview with Cooper from 2011:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BXCx8oNvoo](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=7BXCx8oNvoo)

His more recent book (not out yet): The Fall of Heaven: The Pahlavis and the
Final Days of Imperial Iran

[http://www.amazon.com/The-Fall-Heaven-Pahlavis-
Imperial/dp/0...](http://www.amazon.com/The-Fall-Heaven-Pahlavis-
Imperial/dp/0805098976)

But be aware that as always, behind every tyrant walks a cadre of sycophants
with bloody mops attempting to twist history & exonerate the guilty. IMHO
Hooman Majd, Reza Aslan and Trita Parsi are all varying degrees of apologists
for the Islamic regime.

If you have a more specific interest, let me know and perhaps I'll be able to
recommend something else.

~~~
kzahel
I really appreciate your sharing these sources.

For anyone else interested, I found the BBC series Iran and the West is
currently available on YouTube [https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka-
Wu1jYY9U](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Ka-Wu1jYY9U)

------
Retric
The sad thing is Iran used to be reasonably liberal in the 1960's. Based on
pictures from that time period, but politics got really ugly.

IMO, it's a classic case of nut-jobs on both sides of a boarder causing pain
for a wide range of people.

~~~
kobayashi
>IMO, it's a classic case of nut-jobs on both sides of a boarder causing pain
for a wide range of people.

I think this is a classic statement meant to be non-controversial enough that
everyone can read their own opinion into it, but is inaccurate and adds
nothing of substance to the conversation.

Iran didn't become the illiberal theocracy that it is today because of 'nut
jobs outside its borders', but because the student revolution that ousted the
Shah was co-opted by the hardline clerics, led by Ruhollah Khomeini, who were
better organized than the student protestors.

The most reasonable argument for external forces being responsible for Iran's
current state as a repressive regime, and as the world's largest state-sponsor
of terrorism, is that Khomeini wasn't even inside Iran at the time of the
revolution, and swooped in just in time to capitalize on the revolutionary
struggle of others.

~~~
Retric
I was more thinking democracy > dictatorship > theocracy. I suspect the direct
democracy > theocracy jump is harder, but I could be wrong. So, in this case
the external nut-jobs would be the CIA in 1950's.

------
agorabinary
A great lecture on Iran:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtELk8S3dhU](https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rtELk8S3dhU)

Really gives some perspective on an oft-misunderstood place.

~~~
lingben
While Rick Steves is a warm and wonderful person he is no authority on Iran.
He visited Iran and was carefully stage managed to present only the positive
side of things and completely ignore the rest.

He is not a historian, he is not a sociologist, he is not an orientalist, he
has zero credentials or background which would make him in any way an
authority or a source of insight.

He went to Iran and had a great time visiting different cities and sites. And
he talked to many people, while government minders were close by but off
camera.

Therefore, this presentation is what it is: an anecdotal account of one man's
carefully choreographed visit to a country.

And I'll add that I'm saying this as an Iranian - I wish I didn't have to add
that but it seems that sometimes good intentioned people see anything negative
written about Iran or a 'brown' country and automatically think it is
motivated by racism or bigotry.

~~~
nashashmi
> He is not a historian, he is not a sociologist, he is not an orientalist, he
> has zero credentials or background which would make him in any way an
> authority or a source of insight.

He has traveled the world and visited lots of countries and viewed them with
an open mind. He can make comparisons and contrasts. He can derive lessons as
he did in the video where he touted the benefits of church/state separation. I
think he has some expertise now. And definitely more than the theoretical
historians, sociologists, orientalists who have never been in the field like
he has.

> while government minders were close by but off camera.

Never mentioned this on camera. But he did mention that security would often
inquire and investigate what he was up to.

> was carefully stage managed

He was not really stage managed. His focus was on the Iranian side of Iran,
the human side, not the government side. And if he found information that he
could not document, he spoke about it. That is not 'stage managed'.

~~~
lingben
Iran is an authoritarian country like North Korea. No foreign press is allowed
in without first requesting a special permit. Among the information they have
to present is who they are and what they are planning on reporting on. This is
the first filter.

For example, if you request a press pass to enter Iran and report on the
persecution of Bahais, don't be surprised if you are turned down.

But once allowed in, that's not the end of it. They are monitored and
carefully managed to only present the positive. Also, who they speak to and
what they say and hear is also monitored.

This is well known and routine. Therefore, to think that a choreographed and
superficial 'feel good' anecdotal video like Rick Steve's presents anything
approaching reality is the height of naivete.

------
jernfrost
Very exciting news, that made me happy about the news for a change. I am
confident we can make Iran into a normal country if we show them some good
will. It is a country full of all political stripes like anywhere else. The
confrontational policies of the past has emboldened the Iranian hardliners.

It is time to embolden the moderates and reformers in Iran! When you read
about the details of Iranian society, it is very clear that they have a huge
amount of potential. Regular Iranians are the most positive to the west in the
region. Religion is in strong decline there. They got a lot of real industry
there. They are big car manufacturers e.g. They have more scientific output
than the whole Arab world combined. Their strain of Islam is not as extremist
as the one found among the gulf states like Qatar, Saudi Arabia, Jemen etc.

We got to give the Iranians reasons to believe that playing well with the west
will give them a lot more benefits than antagonizing Israel.

I support Israel's existence but I really wish they had a more moderate and
constructive leader than Bibbi. He really comes across as a deranged
conspiracy theorist. To make real progress we really need to get Iran and
Israel to make the peace.

------
jameslk
Now if only we could do away with the double standard and hold Isreal
responsible for their nuclear escapades[0] too.

0\.
[https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel](https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_weapons_and_Israel)

~~~
TheGuyWhoCodes
Israel never publicly announced the willing and need to destroy another
country, and it doesn't not support terror organization with monetary and
military aid, it has never carried out terror attacks specially targeted at
civilians. So yes double standards indeed.

~~~
jameslk
This is a really poor argument for why Israel is allowed to skirt the Non-
Proliferation Treaty scot-free. _The less nuclear weapons we have to worry
about, the better_. But instead, the US rewards them with billions of dollars
and high-tech weaponry[0]. When other countries do the same, like Iran, they
receive sanctions and threats of military action (Iran is even a member of the
NPT[1]). Worse yet, Iran has been clear about its intentions[2] and there's
been high-profile accounts of intelligence officials agreeing that Iran isn't
pursuing nuclear weapons[3][4]. And we wonder what kind of message this double
standard sends to the rest of the world...

0\.
[http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf](http://www.fas.org/sgp/crs/mideast/RL33222.pdf)

1\. [https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-
Proliferatio...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Treaty_on_the_Non-
Proliferation_of_Nuclear_Weapons#Iran)

2\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nuclear_program_of_Iran)

3\.
[https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Views_on_the_nuclear_program_o...](https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Views_on_the_nuclear_program_of_Iran#2007_U.S._National_Intelligence_Estimate_.28NIE.29)

4\. [http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/23/leaked-spy-
cabl...](http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/23/leaked-spy-cables-
netanyahu-iran-bomb-mossad)

~~~
DrScump
If you read your own link #1, you will see that Israel is _not even a
signatory_ to the treaty, so they aren't "skirting" anything.

Iran and North Korea _are_ signatories but violated it anyway.

~~~
jameslk
By skirt I meant avoid. It's a lot easier to violate a treaty by not even
recognizing it. By that logic, Iran and North Korea would have been better off
not signing it too. North Korea actually announced its withdrawal from the NPT
in 2003.

------
bronz
So what did he mean when he said that Iran would be able to access its
holdings abroad?

"A senior American official said Saturday that Iran will be able to access
about $50 billion of a reported $100 billion in holdings abroad, although
others have used higher estimates."

~~~
mikeyouse
Prior to the sanctions, Iran had billions of dollars invested in foreign banks
and infrastructure. Their access to this money was cut off when the sanctions
were put into place and we're slowly allowing them access. Here's an article
from 2014 with more detail:

[http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-assets-usa-
idUSBREA0G...](http://www.reuters.com/article/us-iran-assets-usa-
idUSBREA0G0LR20140117)

~~~
bronz
Thank you.

------
joezydeco
Crude oil is expected to fall another $2-$3 on Monday after this news. Curious
what that will do to the rest of the market.

------
audessuscest
They always did. It's just that now we agree to recognize it...

------
rajacombinator
Nice (surprising) to see some let up in the US's brutal war of aggression
against Iran!

------
TheGuyWhoCodes
This is the worst news this year. More money for terror, seems legit.

~~~
agorabinary
The single best way to reduce terrorism, civil strife, and violence in general
is greater prosperity. Keeping people poor, ignorant and frustrated is a
guarantee of future terrorism.

~~~
TheGuyWhoCodes
If only that new found prosperity wouldn't be used directly for terrorism I
would agree with you. Lack of prosperity and poor education, didn't contribute
to the sanctions been put on Iran but of direct action by the government.
Lifting them will not help Iran become western democracy or less fanatic it's
left wing bullshit.

------
vonklaus
Makes a lot of sense. The scrawny kid with low self esteem who has a bad
family life so he lashes out from time to time, is entirely ostracized by all
the popular kids until he agrees to turn in his red ruder bb gun.

~~~
noir_lord
Not sure I'd call the US scrawny.

