Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ extension of Obama’s ‘crippling pressure’: Iran human rights official

The ‘maximum pressure’ policy exercised by the administration of US President Donald Trump is nothing new, a senior official of Iran’s Judiciary says, noting that it is merely an extension of the ‘crippling pressure’ policy followed by former president, Barack Obama, which aimed to stymie Iran’s progress in all fields.

Ali Baqeri-Kani, who heads the Iranian Judiciary’s High Council for Human Rights, made the remarks while giving an exclusive interview to Iran Press news agency, which was released on Monday.

Commenting on the assassination of Iran’s top nuclear scientist Mohsen Fakhrizadeh, he said, “My assessment is that this crime is the continuation of Trump’s ‘maximum pressure’ policy, which ... is a translation of the ‘crippling pressure’, which was exerted by Americans on the Iranian nation under Obama.”

“This policy has two branches. One branch is related to sanctions and this step was taken against the Islamic Republic of Iran in a serious manner under Obama, and covered various fields, including basic needs of the Iranian people,” Baqeri-Kani said.

The judicial official noted that the sanctions policy was intensified under Trump and covered the supply of medicine and medical equipment to Iran as well.

Baqeri-Kani then blamed European countries for implementing the US sanctions policy against Iran, saying, “Since we had no direct trade deals with the US, the main burden for sanctioning the Iranian nation fell on the shoulders of [other] Western countries. That is, the White House and US Congress approved sanctions and Western countries enforced them.”

Trump, a hawkish critic of the landmark 2015 nuclear deal between Iran and six world powers, officially known as the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action (JCPOA), unilaterally withdrew Washington from the agreement in May 2018, and unleashed the “toughest ever” sanctions against the Islamic Republic in defiance of global criticism.

Following its much-criticized exit, Washington has been attempting to prevent the remaining signatories – Britain, France, China and Russia plus Germany – from abiding by their commitments and thus kill the historic agreement, which is widely viewed as a fruit of international diplomacy.

MG