This article is written by Amir Taheri. http://nypost.com/2015/04/04/translated-version-of-iran-deal-doesnt-say-what-obama-claims-it-does/This has to be the first time that the New York Post has ever been quoted seriously here. The Post's politics are unhidden in the original, however, I have deleted the editorializing. Of course, it could be that the Post's politics have infected even its ability to provide accurate translations. However, in my judgment that is unlikely given the ease of fact-checking.
I am relying solely on Mr. Taheri's accuracy in this article to make the following statements: I did think, and almost wrote, that it was suspicious that all of the media quoted in an earlier post--The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, BBC, vox.com, the Washington Post--immediately hailed "Parameters." It was done so quickly that there was a whiff of being canned, like it was written partially beforehand. I did write that the Mogherini-Zarif presser was much ado about nothing and I have written today of the more subtle muddying of the waters in order to make them look deep in "Parameters" itself. It never entered my mind however that something as fundamental as the linguistic versions of the text could be different. I took it without a whiff of doubt that the Iranian version of "Parameters" had as its first word the Persian word for "Parameters!" Not true, says Mr. Taheri. Not even close. Not only are the Iranian and American versions different, says Taheri, but the American version differs meaningfully from the Italian and French! Assuming Amir Taheri's article is true, the American people have been deceived, spectacularly so.
“Iran Agrees to Detailed Nuclear Outline,” The New York Times headline claimed on Friday. That found an echo in the Washington Post headline of the same day: “Iran agrees to nuclear restrictions in framework deal with world powers.”
...there has been no agreement on any of the fundamental issues...
...
First, we have a joint statement...by Iranian Foreign Minister Muhammad Javad Zarif and the European Union foreign policy point-woman Federica Mogherini...
Next we have the official Iranian text, in Persian...
They amount to different, at times starkly contradictory, narratives.
The Mogherini and French texts are vague enough to be ultimately meaningless, even as spin.
The Persian text carefully avoids words that might give the impression that anything has been agreed by the Iranian side or that the Islamic Republic has offered any concessions.
The Iranian text is labelled as a press statement only. The American text, however, pretends to enumerate “Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” and claims key points have been “decided.” What remains to be done is work out “implementation details.”
...
The Iranian text opens by insisting that it has absolutely no “legal aspect” and is intended only as “a guideline for drafting future accords.”
The American text claims that Iran has agreed to do this or that, for example reducing the number of centrifuges from 19,000 to 6,500.
The Iranian text, however, says that Iran “shall be able to . . .” or “qader khahad boud” in Farsi to do such a thing. The same is true about enrichment in Fordow. The Americans say Iran has agreed to stop enrichment there for 15 years. The Iranian text, however, refers to this as something that Iran “will be able to do,” if it so wished.
Sometimes the two texts are diametrically opposed.
The American statement claims that Iran has agreed not to use advanced centrifuges, each of which could do the work of 10 old ones. The Iranian text, however, insists that “on the basis of solutions found, work on advanced centrifuges shall continue on the basis of a 10-year plan.”
The American text claims that Iran has agreed to dismantle the core of the heavy water plutonium plant in Arak. The Iranian text says the opposite. The plant shall remain and be updated and modernized.
Kerry and Obama:...the Iranian nuclear project and its military-industrial offshoots would be put under a kind of international tutelage for 10, 15 or even 25 years.
However, the Persian, Italian and French texts contain no such figures.
The US talks of sanctions “ relief” while Iran claims the sanctions would be “immediately terminated.”
The American text claims Tehran has agreed to take measures to reassure the international community on military aspects of its nuclear project...There is absolutely no echo of that in the Iranian and other non-American texts.
I am relying solely on Mr. Taheri's accuracy in this article to make the following statements: I did think, and almost wrote, that it was suspicious that all of the media quoted in an earlier post--The New York Times, Wall Street Journal, BBC, vox.com, the Washington Post--immediately hailed "Parameters." It was done so quickly that there was a whiff of being canned, like it was written partially beforehand. I did write that the Mogherini-Zarif presser was much ado about nothing and I have written today of the more subtle muddying of the waters in order to make them look deep in "Parameters" itself. It never entered my mind however that something as fundamental as the linguistic versions of the text could be different. I took it without a whiff of doubt that the Iranian version of "Parameters" had as its first word the Persian word for "Parameters!" Not true, says Mr. Taheri. Not even close. Not only are the Iranian and American versions different, says Taheri, but the American version differs meaningfully from the Italian and French! Assuming Amir Taheri's article is true, the American people have been deceived, spectacularly so.
“Iran Agrees to Detailed Nuclear Outline,” The New York Times headline claimed on Friday. That found an echo in the Washington Post headline of the same day: “Iran agrees to nuclear restrictions in framework deal with world powers.”
...there has been no agreement on any of the fundamental issues...
...
First, we have a joint statement...by Iranian Foreign Minister Muhammad Javad Zarif and the European Union foreign policy point-woman Federica Mogherini...
Next we have the official Iranian text, in Persian...
They amount to different, at times starkly contradictory, narratives.
The Mogherini and French texts are vague enough to be ultimately meaningless, even as spin.
The Persian text carefully avoids words that might give the impression that anything has been agreed by the Iranian side or that the Islamic Republic has offered any concessions.
The Iranian text is labelled as a press statement only. The American text, however, pretends to enumerate “Parameters for a Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action” and claims key points have been “decided.” What remains to be done is work out “implementation details.”
...
The Iranian text opens by insisting that it has absolutely no “legal aspect” and is intended only as “a guideline for drafting future accords.”
The American text claims that Iran has agreed to do this or that, for example reducing the number of centrifuges from 19,000 to 6,500.
The Iranian text, however, says that Iran “shall be able to . . .” or “qader khahad boud” in Farsi to do such a thing. The same is true about enrichment in Fordow. The Americans say Iran has agreed to stop enrichment there for 15 years. The Iranian text, however, refers to this as something that Iran “will be able to do,” if it so wished.
Sometimes the two texts are diametrically opposed.
The American statement claims that Iran has agreed not to use advanced centrifuges, each of which could do the work of 10 old ones. The Iranian text, however, insists that “on the basis of solutions found, work on advanced centrifuges shall continue on the basis of a 10-year plan.”
The American text claims that Iran has agreed to dismantle the core of the heavy water plutonium plant in Arak. The Iranian text says the opposite. The plant shall remain and be updated and modernized.
Kerry and Obama:...the Iranian nuclear project and its military-industrial offshoots would be put under a kind of international tutelage for 10, 15 or even 25 years.
However, the Persian, Italian and French texts contain no such figures.
The US talks of sanctions “ relief” while Iran claims the sanctions would be “immediately terminated.”
The American text claims Tehran has agreed to take measures to reassure the international community on military aspects of its nuclear project...There is absolutely no echo of that in the Iranian and other non-American texts.
