Danger: Iran's Arms Embargo About to Expire

by Majid Rafizadeh
June 17, 2020 at 5:00 am

https://www.gatestoneinstitute.org/16119/iran-arms-embargo

Translations of this item:

Dutch
German

Who will benefit from lifting the arms embargo? Russia and China. They would most likely be the preferred weapons exporters to Iran. With prospects for multi-billion dollar deals, Moscow and Beijing would doubtless be delighted to sell weapons to Iran.
Tehran will likely utilize the sophisticated weaponry to advance its hegemonic ambitions in the region, increase its military adventurism in the Middle East, and ship arms to its proxies and militia groups to destabilize the region and trigger an arms race across the Middle East.

Who will benefit from lifting the arms embargo from Iran? Russia and China. With prospects for multi-billion dollar deals, Moscow and Beijing would doubtless be delighted to sell weapons to Iran. Pictured: Russian President Vladimir Putin, Chinese President Xi Jinping and Iranian President Hassan Rouhani in Bishkek, Kyrgyzstan, on June 14, 2019. (Photo by Vyacheslav Oseledko/AFP via Getty Images)

Among the many concessions that the Obama-Biden administration gave to the ruling mullahs of Iran, was one setting a date when Iran's arms embargo would be lifted. The Obama administration agreed to add a provision in the nuclear deal -- which, by the way, Iran never got around to signing -- allowing the lifting of an arms embargo.

Now, again thanks to the Obama-Biden administration, the arms embargo is set to expire in October 2020.

It is important to point out that the Obama administration erased years of efforts and significant political capital that the international community had invested to impose the arms embargo in the first place.

From December 2006 to 2010, the five members of the United Nations Security Council finally agreed to pass series of resolutions (Resolution 1737, Resolution 1747, and Resolution 1929) imposing significant restrictions on Iran's arms activities.

The UN Security Council resolution 1929 stated:

"Iran shall not undertake any activity related to ballistic missiles capable of delivering nuclear weapons, including launches using ballistic missile technology, and that States shall take all necessary measures to prevent the transfer of technology or technical assistance to Iran related to such activities".

The ban encompassed a wide range of weapons, including large-caliber artillery, combat aircraft, battle tanks, armored combat vehicles, attack helicopters, some missiles and missile launchers, and warships.

The mullahs, in addition, scored a major political victory when the US administration in 2015 added a section to the nuclear deal permitting the lifting of the arms embargo through two sunset clauses.

It was mind-boggling that the Obama-Biden administration decided to include such an appeasing and dangerous provision in the nuclear deal. Both Democrats and Republicans were, in fact, stunned by the move. At the time, speaker of the U.S. House of Representatives and the leading Republican in Congress, John Boehner, pointed out : "It blows my mind that the administration would agree to lift the arms and missile bans."

Senator Ben Cardin, the former leading Democrat on the Senate Foreign Relations Committee, agreed. "It's hard for us to accept it, so we just want to take a look at it," he said.

If the arms embargo on the theocratic establishment of Iran were lifted, the Iranian regime would be allowed legally to export and import advanced weapons, which would subsequently strengthen the military apparatuses of the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC) and its elite branch, the Quds Force.

Who will benefit from lifting the arms embargo? Russia and China. They would most likely be the preferred arms exporters to Iran. With prospects for multi-billion dollar deals, Moscow and Beijing would doubtless be delighted to sell weapons to Iran.

That is probably why the Russian Foreign Ministry last month pointed out:

"It has been said in Congress that the United States would try to convince Russia and China not to veto the draft UN Security Council resolution on extending the arms embargo on Iran. But it is no use raising this matter in the Security Council. There are no grounds for this. The timeframe and conditions coordinated in 2015 are not subject to revision."

Tehran will likely utilize the sophisticated weaponry to advance its hegemonic ambitions in the region, increase its military adventurism in the Middle East, and ship arms to its proxies and militia groups to destabilize the region and trigger an arms race across the Middle East.

Notably, the arms embargo is to be lifted against a regime that is the world's top state sponsor of terrorism. Iran has already been caught several times smuggling weapons to its militia and terror groups in violation of the UN Resolution 2231, which ostensibly prevents Iran from transferring arms directly or indirectly out of its territories without the approval of the UN Security Council. For example, it was revealed that Iran has been shipping weapons and military advisers to the Houthis either directly to Yemen or via Somalia.

If the arms embargo on the Iranian regime is removed, imagine how much more the "top state sponsor of terrorism" will ratchet up its delivery of weapons and ammunition to militia and terror groups.

In short, thanks to the Obama-Biden administration, Iran's arms embargo, set to expire in few months, would further assist the mullahs' predatory regime even more powerfully to pursue its destabilizing, militaristic and aggressive policies across the world.

Dr. Majid Rafizadeh is a business strategist and advisor, Harvard-educated scholar, political scientist, board member of Harvard International Review, and president of the International American Council on the Middle East. He has authored several books on Islam and US foreign policy. He can be reached at Dr.Rafizadeh@Post.Harvard.Edu

Follow Majid Rafizadeh on X (formerly Twitter)

© 2024 Gatestone Institute. All rights reserved. The articles printed here do not necessarily reflect the views of the Editors or of Gatestone Institute. No part of the Gatestone website or any of its contents may be reproduced, copied or modified, without the prior written consent of Gatestone Institute.

Related Topics: Iran

Recent Articles by Majid Rafizadeh

The Possibility of a 'Golden Age' in the Middle East, 2024-11-16
Peace in the Middle East: The First Step, 2024-11-09
Global Threat: The Biden-Harris Administration Is Enabling Iran to Become the Next Nuclear State, 2024-11-02
Iranian Missiles Hit Europe: Europe Does Nothing, 2024-10-26
Israel Fights Alone, Carrying by Itself a Catatonically Suicidal West, 2024-10-19

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free gatestone institute mailing list.

Comment on this item

7 Reader Comments

David • Jun 25, 2020 at 12:07

I thought Iran was a bit strapped for cash at the moment. Maybe they could buy now, pay later? (or not at all)

Reply->

frank haskell • Jun 18, 2020 at 07:26

We still have not calculated how much of an influence the Chinese AND Iranians have been in driving the riots in the USA. It is hard to believe that General Flynn was not a victim of the convoluted Obama-Biden standards to force a secret deal on the USA. We still have no idea if that included complicity in opposing Maliki, a Shiite Iraqi nationalist, to advance an Iraqi President more receptive to Iran. We know for instance that when our troops withdrew, a bad dea, Iran's Quds Force entered Iraq openly if discreetly. However, they were not up to providing the sort of radio recon JTOC the US strike package has and the Iraqis once again were reliant on the USA to get their country back. This set the Ayatollah's grand design and regional revolution lead by Tehran back and the aspirations for a Tehran pipeline and rail line from Iran to Beirut new obstacles.

General Flynn was anti-Iran; he is also a supporter of Frank Gaffney Jr and yet no one has even broached the topic of the effect of the Iranians although Chinese influence is negotiable in the media. In fact the Democrats have done much to play down the impact of radical mosques and legitimate Congressional Reps with strong relations to Farrakhan, or the PA, like Tlaib, Omar and McCulllom who also have ties to BenSuda.

Peter Beinart wrote for the Atlantic Monthly "The Denationalization of American Muslims" and never mentions the domestic strains of Black Islam and no one notes the impact of 5%ers on felons that are most probably participating in the violence and certainly it is addressed as if taboo. It is hard to imagine that BLM professing to be non violent is not simply the "political" wing of more violent actors committing arson and looting, and other acts of egregious violence unrelated in any way to singular instances of police actions resulting in deaths, BLM also fails to note that "Whites" and other minorities are also sometimes the victims of police excess.

We have a legal system to work it out not based on sharia or given to perverse notions that blacks are somehow above the law, also a sharia belief when judging "non believers. The two are inextricably linked and yet the mouthpieces of the DNC remain lethargically ignorant of these facts and piled on General Flynn and Gaffney who do.

The question is when will proof be available to substantiate what I believe are facts? And why is leftist and Islamist "analysis" accepted without like substantiation? Ar we intimidated by the threat of violence? In a Kafka-like trial where we know we are guilty of something and should be guilted into false confessions?

Reply->

D3F1ANT • Jun 17, 2020 at 23:35

This is purely symbolic... Iran and the Axis of Evil didn't abide by the embargo anyway.

Reply->

Phil Copson • Jun 17, 2020 at 08:05

There is no such thing as a "deal" where one side is obliged to observe it's provisions, but the other side isn't: Since Iran didn't sign the deal, then the Trump administration are under no obligation to end the embargo.

In fact - for the safety of the world - they have a moral obligation NOT to end it.....

They should simply state that the embargo would be reviewed when Iran has demonstrated that it is fit to be trusted with any weapon system above and beyond those required to maintain it's borders.

This would, of course, be "Never".....

Reply->

HOWARD JOFFE

Phil Copson • Jun 17, 2020 at 15:33

Phil Copson has hit the nail on the head....'Never say never" Phil - the Americans will just make life tougher for the Iranians by increasing sanctions. Trump is the right man for the job - he will not bow to Iranian, Russian nor Chinese pressure. Cometh the hour, cometh the man.
Americans have a leader worthy of the name leader in Trump.

Reply->

Hamish MacDonald • Jun 17, 2020 at 05:32

Obama made the classic mistake which is the result of lack of education, to attempt appeasement of Islam, while profiling and political posturing.
One man's ambitions against possible bloodletting on a vast scale show his terrible selfishness of certain US politicians, and the awful consequences.

Reply->

Brian Ozzy

Hamish MacDonald • Jun 19, 2020 at 04:21

I beg to disagree with your comments that Obama's folly's were the result of lack of education. He knew exactly what he was doing. Without much doubt Obama was a Muslim and if not then he was very pro-Muslim as was displayed in many instances such as his obsequious kowtowing round of all the Muslim countries as one of his first acts in office. Also his many whitewashing comments on the so called religion of peace. Obama's policy was the weakening of America and the strengthening of all her foes. He succeeded 100% with his agenda unfortunately to the detriment of the USA.

Reply->