2) For almost two years, US officials and their so-called "hawkish" advisors persistently and categorically refuted any accusation of illegal conduct regarding the #JCPOA, insisting that the U.S has not "violated" the #IranDeal but only "withdrawn" from it!
3) In fact, from the very first Presidential memoranda (announcing the withdrawal) to every subsequent official statement and position they took, US officials took care to stress that America did not violate the agreement but only "ceased participation"! 
4) Today, they claim the US should be considered a JCPOA "participant" because they want to exercise the "right" to invoke the so-called "snapback mechanism"!
https://twitter.com/rich_goldberg/status/1231558127784546304
5) Basically the argument is this:
Resolution 2231 referred to the U.S as a "participant" to the JCPOA when initially drafted. So, although we announced a 1000 times that we're no longer participant, we should still be treated as a "participant" because the resolution still refers to us as such!
6) In other words, they say the rest of the world should set aside relevant parts of JCPOA, forget its procedures, forget every US official statement made since May 2018 & strictly rely on a textualist interpretation of SC resolution 2231, with no context
https://twitter.com/rich_goldberg/status/1231754371085537280
7) What these bright advisors neglect is that the rest of the world is not as gullible as the people who pay their salary in Washington!
8) What they don't tell their boss (and public opinion) is that in interpreting Security Council resolutions "shall be taken into account, together with the context, three other matters: subsequent agreements, subsequent practice and any other relevant rules of international law"
9) Or, as stated in the Kosovo case (2010) by the International Court of Justice (par. 94):
10) "The interpretation of SC resolutions may require the Court to analyse statements by representatives of members of the Security Council made at the time of their adoption, other resolutions of the Security Council on the same issue...
"...as well as the subsequent practice of relevant United Nations organs and of States affected by those given resolutions".
11) All this aside, these people don't see anything legally or ethically wrong either with relying on the text of a resolution (2231) that the U.S has not only blatantly violated but forced others to violate as well!
12) But who expects anything "legal" or "moral" from a crowd that's been promoting war and #EconomicTerrorism for years anymore?
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
