The Sixth Seal by Nostradamus (Revelation 6:12)

The Sixth Seal by Nostradamus

To Andrew the Prophet
Completed February 5, 2008

Nostradamus and the New City

Les Propheties
(Century 1 Quatrain 27)

Michel de Nostredame Earth-shaking fire from the center of the earth.Will cause the towers around the New City to shake,Two great rocks for a long time will make war, And then Arethusa will color a new river red.(And then areth USA will color a new river red.) Earth-shaking fire from the center of the earth.Will cause the towers around the New City to shake,Two great rocks for a long time will make war

There is recent scientific evidence from drill core sampling in Manhattan, that the southern peninsula is overlapped by several tectonic plates. Drill core sampling has been taken from regions south of Canal Street including the Trade Towers’ site. Of particular concern is that similar core samples have been found across the East River in Brooklyn. There are also multiple fault lines along Manhattan correlating with north-northwest and northwest trending neo-tectonic activity. And as recently as January and October of 2001, New York City has sustained earthquakes along these plates. For there are “two great rocks” or tectonic plates that shear across Manhattan in a northwestern pattern. And these plates “for a longtime will make war”, for they have been shearing against one other for millions of years. And on January 3 of 2010, when they makewar with each other one last time, the sixth seal shall be opened, and all will know that the end is near.

And then Arethusa will color a new river red.

Arethusa is a Greek mythological figure, a beautiful huntress and afollower of the goddess Artemis. And like Artemis, Arethusa would have nothing to do with me; rather she loved to run and hunt in the forest. But one day after an exhausting hunt, she came to a clear crystal stream and went in it to take a swim. She felt something from beneath her, and frightened she scampered out of the water. A voice came from the water, “Why are you leaving fair maiden?” She ran into the forest to escape, for the voice was from Alpheus, the god of the river. For he had fallen in love with her and became a human to give chase after her. Arethusa in exhaustion called out to Artemis for help, and the goddess hid her by changing her into a spring.But not into an ordinary spring, but an underground channel that traveled under the ocean from Greece to Sicily. But Alpheus being the god of the river, converted back into water and plunged downthe same channel after Arethusa. And thus Arethusa was captured by Artemis, and their waters would mingle together forever. And of great concern is that core samples found in train tunnels beneath the Hudson River are identical to those taken from southern Manhattan. Furthermore, several fault lines from the 2001 earthquakes were discovered in the Queen’s Tunnel Complex, NYC Water Tunnel #3. And a few years ago, a map of Manhattan drawn up in 1874 was discovered, showing a maze of underground waterways and lakes. For Manhattan was once a marshland and labyrinth of underground streams. Thus when the sixth seal is broken, the subways of the New City shall be flooded be Arethusa:the waters from the underground streams and the waters from the sea. And Arethusa shall be broken into two. And then Arethusa will color a new river red.

And then areth USA will color a new river red.

For Arethusa broken into two is areth USA. For areth (αρετη) is the Greek word for values. But the values of the USA are not based on morality, but on materialism and on wealth. Thus when the sixth seal is opened, Wall Street and our economy shall crash and “arethUSA”, the values of our economy shall fall “into the red.” “Then the kings of the earth and the great men and the commanders and the rich and the strong and every slave and free man hid themselves in the caves and among the rocks of the mountains; and they said to the mountains and to the rocks, ‘Fall on us and hide us from the presence of Him who sits on the throne, and from the wrath of the Lamb; for the great day of their wrath has come, and who is able to stand?’” (Revelation 6:15-17)

Russia Prepares Ukraine for a Nuclear Meltdown: Daniel 7

Russians launch 87 strikes on Zaporizhzhia region over past day

13.05.2023 10:19

On May 12, the Russian army launched 87 attacks on Zaporizhzhia region, 20 settlements came under fire.

Yuriy Malashko, the head of the Zaporizhzhia Regional Military Administration, wrote this on Telegram, Ukrinform reports.

“20 frontline towns and villages on the front line were hit by 87 strikes, including Malynivka, Huliaipole, Orikhiv, Zaliznychne, Poltavka, Shcherbaky,” Malashko noted.

According to him, “the enemy struck 80 times with artillery, attacked twice using aircraft, twice from MLRS and twice used UAVs.”Read also: Five people injured as enemy hit industrial facility in Khmelnytskyi region

“We are recording new destruction of civil infrastructure, damage to homes, but, fortunately, the population was not harmed,” the regional governor said.

As Ukrinform reported, on the night of May 11, the Russian army fired missiles at Zaporizhzhia, hitting infrastructure facilities.

Fears Mount Over Iranian Nuclear Horn As Inspections Fall Sharply: Daniel 8

Fears Mount Over Iran Bomb As Nuclear Inspections Fall Sharply

Checks on Iran’s nuclear programme by international experts fell sharply last year, according to data from the UN atomic watchdog.

Inspections by the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) were down 10% in 2022.

The agency’s director general, Rafael Mariano Grossi, revealed in an internal memo seen by Bloomberg News that his inspectors had been “seriously affected by Iran’s decision” to end monitoring agreements created under the now defunct 2015 JCPOA deal.

The fall in inspections comes amid mounting international concern over Iran’s nuclear programme, after the Islamic Republic has already removed cameras and surveillance equipment.

Experts fear the regime may be closing in on its ambition to build a nuclear weapon with ever greater brazen ambition, and with the international community increasingly handicapped in its ability to monitor Iran’s progress.

Tehran continues to protest that its nuclear programme is peaceful, to the disbelief of experts in the outside world.

Grossi wrote in the annual IAEA Safeguards Implementation Report: “Iran has yet to clarify and resolve the outstanding safeguards issues.”

He added: “There is important and significant work ahead of us on this matter.”

On a visit to Tehran in March after Iran was found to be producing uranium of almost weapons-grade purity, Grossi had called for greater transparency by the Islamic Republic but welcomed its “high-level assurances”.

But whatever has been said in public, the newly disclosed data reveals an increasingly uncooperative Tehran.

The news will dismay domestic observers in Iran who fear that the regime’s obstructive approach will only prolong sanctions amid a continuing economic crisis.

Desantis Opposes One World Currency: Revelation 12

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis speaks during a press conference to sign several bills related to public education and increases in teacher pay, in Miami, Tuesday, May 9, 2023. (AP Photo/Rebecca Blackwell)

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis Bans CBDCs in the State

Fri, May 12, 2023, 1:36 PM MDT

Florida Governor Ron DeSantis signed a bill on Friday banning the use of a “centralized digital dollar,” otherwise known as a central bank digital currency or CBDC, in the state.

DeSantis has been relentless in his attacks on a CBDCs, saying last week that they were part of “woke politics” that he wants to combat. Now the portion of Florida law that defines money explicitly notes: “The term does not include a central bank digital currency.”

During the press conference, DeSantis posited that President Joe Biden’s administration announced it would be studying CBDCs last year because it wants to “crowd out and eliminate other types of digital assets, like cryptocurrency.”

While standing behind a podium that said “Big Brother’s Digital Dollar,” DeSantis suggested the government might hypothetically use CBDCs to stop people from buying gas to combat global warming or track how often someone purchases firearms.

“Anyone with their eyes open could see the danger this type of an arrangement would mean for Americans who want to exercise their financial independence and would like to be able to conduct business without having the government know every single transaction they’re making in real time.”

The bill, SB-7054, had only one vote cast against itin its final appearance during a Florida House of Representatives session last week. When DeSantis introduced the legislation in March, he said that a CBDC would be about “surveilling Americans and controlling Americans.”

A few days later, DeSantis announced that Florida would accept Bitcoin as payment for state taxes—but only from businesses, not individual tax payers.

Although he hasn’t announced his candidacy yet, but DeSantis has been leading polls for potential Republican Party nominees and recently released a book laying out his stance against what he calls “woke” politics.

Palestinian militants fire more rockets outside the Temple Walls: Revelation 11

Palestinian militants fire more rockets, as Israeli airstrikes hit Gaza despite cease-fire efforts

GAZA CITY, Gaza Strip (AP) — Israeli airstrikes killed a senior militant commander in the Gaza Strip and Palestinian militants fired rockets toward Jerusalem on Friday, further escalating the most violent flare-up in months despite efforts to broker a cease-fire.

An Israeli airstrike killed two Palestinians in a residential building in Gaza City in the afternoon, according to the Palestinian health ministry. 

The Israeli military said it had targeted a senior commander of the Islamic Jihad movement. The Islamic Jihad confirmed that the airstrike killed Iyad Al-Hassani, a member of the decision-making council in the group’s armed wing. He is the sixth senior Islamic Jihad member to be killed in this round of fighting.

Earlier in the day, bursts of rocket fire from Gaza sent warning sirens wailing as far north as the contested capital of Jerusalem — about 48 miles (77 kilometers) from the Gaza border — breaking a 12-hour lull that had raised hopes regional powers could soon broker a truce.

The fighting, which started on Tuesday, between Israel and Islamic Jihad — the second-largest militant group in Gaza after the territory’s Hamas rulers — has killed at least 33 Palestinians in the strip, including women and children, and an 80-year-old woman in central Israel, identified in Israeli media as Inga Avramian.

As Islamic Jihad stepped up its longer-range rocket attacks, a projectile slammed into an open field in the Israeli settlement of Bat Ayin, south of Jerusalem, said Josh Hasten, a spokesperson for the area. Residents in nearby Israeli settlements reported hearing explosions. Dull thuds could be heard inside Jerusalem, home to major sites holy to Christianity, Judaism and Islam.

“The bombing of Jerusalem sends a message,” Islamic Jihad said in a statement. “What is happening in Jerusalem is not separate from Gaza.”

In response, the Israeli warplanes struck Islamic Jihad military posts and mortar shell launchers across the Gaza Strip, the military said.

The office of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he was conducting a security assessment to mount a further response. “We continue,” he tweeted. 

The Israeli military urged residents living within 40 kilometers (25 miles) of the Gaza boundary to remain close to bomb shelters and limit public gatherings until Saturday evening. All big events, including the weekly Saturday protest against the government’s divisive plans to overhaul the judiciary, were cancelled.

The sirens wailing near Jerusalem on Friday took some back to the spring of 2021, when Hamas fired rockets toward the city, which helped set off a bloody 11-day Gaza war. At that time, the militant group cited a provocative far-right march through the Palestinian neighborhoods of Jerusalem as one of the reasons for its rocket barrage, along with the displacement of Palestinians from the city’s east. 

Israeli police said they will allow the same Jewish ultranationalist parade — meant to celebrate Israel’s capture of east Jerusalem — to take place next Thursday.

Since Tuesday, Israeli strikes have killed five senior Islamic Jihad figures and hit at least 215 targets in Gaza, including rocket launch sites and militants preparing to use them. Islamic Jihad has retaliated with over 900 rockets fired toward densely populated parts of Israel.

Israeli bombs and shells have destroyed 47 housing units, and damaged 19 so badly they were uninhabitable, leaving 165 Palestinians homeless, Gaza’s housing ministry reported. In addition, nearly 300 homes sustained some damage.

Palestinians on Friday surveyed the wreckage from the fighting.

“The dream that we built for our children, for our sons, has ended,” said Belal Bashir, a Palestinian living in Deir al-Balah in central Gaza, whose family home was reduced to a heap of rubble in an airstrike late Thursday. He, his young daughters and two-week-old son would have been killed in the thundering explosion if they hadn’t ran outside when they heard shouting, he said.

“We were shocked that our house was targeted,” he added as he pulled his children’s dolls and blankets from a gaping bomb crater.

The Palestinian dead included six children and four women, according to the Palestinian Health Ministry. Two of the children were killed by suspected misfired Palestinian rockets, according to the Israeli military and the Palestinian Center for Human Rights. Over 100 Palestinians have been wounded.

The civilians deaths have drawn condemnation from the Arab world and concern from the United States and Europe. In its past four wars against Hamas, Israel has repeatedly faced accusations of war crimes due to the high civilian death tolls and its use of heavy weapons against the crowded enclave. Israel, in turn, contends that Palestinian militant groups use civilians as human shields by fighting in their midst.

Confrontations between Israel and Palestinian militants in Gaza have recurred 15 times since Hamas seized control of Gaza in 2007. The repeated Israeli bombing campaigns have cast doubt on Netanyahu’s claims of victory and raised serious questions about what the grim routine achieves.

“If the operations were really all that successful, we wouldn’t need them once a year on average, with the time between them becoming shorter,” Amos Harel, the defense affairs commentator for the Haaretz newspaper, wrote in an analysis Friday. “The simple truth is that Israel has no concrete solution for the plight of Gaza or for the security dangers that emanate from the strip.”

Hamas, the de facto civilian government, has sought to maintain its truce with Israel while attempting to keep abysmal living conditions in the blockaded enclave from spiraling since the devastating 2021 war that killed over 260 Palestinians. The group has sat out this round of fighting — as it did a similar burst of violence last summer. In a sign of restraint, Israel has limited its airstrikes to Islamic Jihad targets.

Israeli officials and Islamic Jihad figures have sent mixed signals about negotiations for a cease-fire that neighboring Egypt has pushed for. Senior official Ihsan Attaya complained early Friday that the mediators “have been unable to provide us with any guarantees.” A sticking point has been Islamic Jihad’s demands that Israel cease its policy of targeted killings, Attaya said.

This week’s battles began when Israel launched simultaneous airstrikes that killed three Islamic Jihad commanders along with some of their wives and children as they slept in their homes. Israel said it was retaliating for a barrage of rocket fire launched last week by Islamic Jihad following the death of one of its West Bank members, Khader Adnan, from an 87-day hunger strike while in Israeli custody.

The airstrikes and rockets have shifted the focus of long-running conflict back to Gaza after months of surging violence in the occupied West Bank under Israel’s most right-wing government in history.

India and the First Nuclear War: Revelation 8

India and the future of nuclear arms control

12 May 2023

India began its nuclear journey on a responsible note, and should continue to do so, even if arms control is a tall order amidst complex nuclear politics and contestations 

---

As India commemorates 25 years of the Pokhran-II nuclear tests, nuclear weapons remain central to international politics. The ongoing Russian offensive against Ukraine witnessed the usage of nuclear threats by Russia, which outraged thehttps://andrewtheprophet.com world. The terrifying destructive capability of nuclear weapons has raised concerns and apprehensions with prolonged implications for world politics. As might be expected, the magnitude of contemporary geopolitical complexities, deeply marred by nuclear risks and challenges, will severely impact the prospects of nuclear arms control, the future of the nuclear non-proliferation regime, and nuclear disarmament. Of course, India cannot remain immune to the severity of these lingering consequences. What can India do to enhance arms control?

India and Arms Control

When India conducted the nuclear tests in 1998, great power competition had occupied centre stage with military force being used to revise territorial boundaries amidst coercive nuclear threats. And yet, the world was witness to the fact that, immediately after the conduct of the tests on 11 and 13 May 1998, respectively, India promptly announced a voluntary moratorium on future nuclear tests. Thus, New Delhi conveyed an important measure of assurance to the world that it will refrain from further nuclear tests unless, of course, its national interests are imperilled. The rationale behind India’s position was to minimise the risks and inherent costs of an arms competition and to improve strategic stability. This limits the possibility of a nuclear war, which neither side wants. The objectives of arms control were “to improve the inherent stability of the situation” and mitigate the causes of war.

The rationale behind India’s position was to minimise the risks and inherent costs of an arms competition and to improve strategic stability.

Interestingly, this was not the first time that India proactively supported arms control measures. Since Independence, India has been an ardent advocate for arms control and disarmament. India was the first country to propose a nuclear test ban treaty and a cut-off on the production of materials for nuclear weapons. In 1963, India signed and ratified the Partial Test Ban Treaty that called for a ban on atmospheric, outer space, and underwater nuclear explosions. However, discriminatory nuclear politics over the nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) and the lack of commitment of the nuclear weapon states to Article VI of the NPTproved to be setback for India’s unconditional support to arms control measures.

Nonetheless, following the 1998 nuclear tests, India, in the draft nuclear doctrine of 1999 unconditionally upheld the policy of No-First-Use (NFU). In 2003, India reiterated its official doctrinal position on the NFU policy. India’s NFU policy dates back to 1994, when it extended an agreement on “no-first-use of nuclear capability” to Pakistan. Regrettably, the difficult experiences of the Cold War era did not evoke meaningful lessons and a bilateral NFU treaty could not be implemented between the South Asian neighbours.

Expanding the geographical expanse to Southern Asia, India and China are nuclear neighbours with unstable relations over border revisions since the 1950s. The two nuclear-capable nations share a complex interdependence that can be mutually beneficial in terms of trade. However, unresolved border issues have impeded bilateral relations and largely generated an environment of distrust. China’s ambitions of establishing itself as a hegemonic power in Asia conflicts with similar ambitions by India. This contestation has led to a lack of comprehensive cooperation and whetted hostile ambitions. China has refused to acknowledge India’s nuclear weapons status and, hence, has been largely reluctant to enter into any nuclear arms control measures.

The difficult experiences of the Cold War era did not evoke meaningful lessons and a bilateral NFU treaty could not be implemented between the South Asian neighbours.

Arms control is urgent

Southern Asia is at the centre of complex nuclear politics. India faces two nuclear neighbours with adversarial relations with whom India has fought conventional wars and is fighting a protracted sub-conventional war under the nuclear umbrella. Given this hostile environment, the region urgently requires effective nuclear arms control as a tool for ensuring nuclear stability, nuclear-risk-reduction, and increased nuclear confidence-building measures. The rationale for this urgency is premised upon several factors. First, there is a difference in perception on the probability of a nuclear war between India and Pakistan. In India, the perception is that Pakistan will not resort to nuclear offense for fear of retaliation. Hence, Pakistan can be engaged in conventional and sub-conventional conflicts. Also, since Pakistan does not have a codified nuclear doctrine specifying their nuclear redlines, there remain several assumptions about the circumstances under which a nuclear war may unfold. While this may be apt for purposes of nuclear deterrence, it also significantly increases nuclear risks. In the past, there have been a few instances of nuclear intimidation from Pakistan that have severely corroded strategic security and stability. Pakistani provocations entail the risk of lowering the threshold for nuclear attacks in South Asia and also raises the spectre of unintended accidents. The rapid modernisation of the Chinese and Pakistani nuclear arsenals and their close nuclear nexus raises serious concerns among Indian strategic and security elites.

The road ahead

Nuclear-armed states, being possessors of the most lethal weapons, have a responsibility to act with restraint. India has been consistently restrained in its nuclear posture and upheld the rules and norms of the non-proliferation regime. As a responsible nuclear power, India may consider taking the initiative to extend confidence-building measures that are beneficial to and worth achieving for all the nuclear weapons states in the region. This can involve efforts for a trilateral forum comprising India, Pakistan, and China, wherein, issues pertaining to ballistic missile defence system, development of multiple independently targeted re-entry vehicles (MIRVs) technology, Comprehensive Test Ban Treaty (CTBT), and Fissile Material Cut-off Treaty (FMCT) can be discussed. The CTBT is a relevant tool for banning future nuclear testing and hence an effective arms control measure. The FMCT proscribes future production of fissile material, which is of urgent necessity to restrain the rapidly expanding arsenals of nuclear-capable states like Pakistan and China.

Since Pakistan does not have a codified nuclear doctrine specifying their nuclear redlines, there remain several assumptions about the circumstances under which a nuclear war may unfold.

As an ancillary step, think-tanks, universities and other academic institutions may emphasise and recommend the significance of arms control in Southern Asia. Undoubtedly, for India, any step towards initiating nuclear arms control in Southern Asia is a tall order amidst complex nuclear politics and contestations. However, India’s nuclear journey began on a responsible note and the world would like to believe that India continues to play the role of a responsible nuclear nation, especially when there is so little interest in arms control in Southern Asia.

---

Reshmi Kazi is from the Nelson Mandela Centre for Peace and Conflict Resolution, Jamia Millia Islamia, New Delhi where she teaches Arms Control and Disarmament. The views expressed above belong to the author(s).

AORF research and analyses now available on Telegram! Click here to access our curated content — blogs, longforms and interviews.

Obama-Biden’s Failed Iran Nuclear Deal: Daniel 8

Biden’s ‘no Iran deal, no crisis’ policy is unsustainable

With Tehran’s nuclear program advancing rapidly in absence of the JCPOA, the president has options, if he stops ignoring the issue.

MAY 12, 2023

Written by 
Seyed Hossein Mousavian

In May 2018, Donald Trump withdrew from the 2015 nuclear deal with Iran (the Joint Comprehensive Plan of Action or JCPOA) and President Joe Biden has yet failed to revive it. The Biden administration has not reached a clear political decision to complete the negotiations. On the one hand it insists“diplomacy is the best option,” while, on the other, it says that the JCPOA is “not on the agenda.” This is a mistake.

Since September 2022, negotiations over JCPOA have been stalled. Suspected export of Iranian weapons to Russia for use in Ukraine and unrest in Iran following the killing of Mahsa Amini for not wearing a headscarf turned the U.S. and European focus away from reviving the JCPOA.

In August 2022, the European Union’s foreign policy chief, Josep Borrell, saidthat a final agreement to revive the Iran nuclear deal was ready to be signed. Although Iran’s government did not agree at the time, during recent months it has indicated that it is ready to do both that and a prisoner deal.

Iran and the United States have agreedon the details of a prisoners exchange but Washington is likely nervous about the domestic political reaction because that deal would involve the release of approximately $7 billion of Iran’s funds that have been locked up abroad. Moreover, the Key “sunset” for JCPOA limits on Iran’s nuclear and missile program and arms trade range from 2023 to 2041. Based on the JCPOA, in October 2023, the UN Security Council is supposed to lift restrictions on Iran’s missiles and drones with a range of greater than 300 kilometers. The Biden administration is required to seek congressional legislation that ends some of the U.S. sanctions in this area.

Such sanction lifting could be grist for Republican political attacks on the Biden administration during an election season. But further delay brings its own dangers. Iran’s nuclear program has already reached the point where the country could within two weeks produce enough weapon-grade uranium for one nuclear bomb.

In the face of this complex situation, the Biden administration is dithering. It may be considering a “temporary agreement” as a middle way for the U.S. to contain this situation. This would be consistent with the Biden administration’s recent policy of “No Deal, No Crisis” with Iran in which the administration is also trying to avoid a major military conflict. In March, there was a clash between Iranian and U.S. forces in Syria.

The United States and Europe are therefore faced with three policy options.

The first is this aforementioned “temporary agreement” or plan B. Most probably, the U.S. would demand a freeze on critical parts of Iran’s nuclear program, including no more enrichment of uranium to near weapon grade, and reductions in Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium in exchange for limited relaxation of U.S. sanctions. Iran has already rejected this option because it would lose the bargaining leverage provided by its stock of highly enriched uranium in exchange for limited sanction relief in an unsustainable temporary agreement.

A more realistic version of this option would be a more-for-more alternative. Iran would like to see sanctions lifted on both its financial institutions and oil exports. The U.S. and Europe are concerned about Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium and reestablishing Iran’s voluntary compliance with the Additional Protocol to its safeguards agreement with the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA). Inspections allowed by the Additional Protocol would help the IAEA determine whether Iran has built any secret nuclear facilities during the period it suspended its transparency.

A temporary agreement would not be a sustainable solution, however, and it is unlikely in any case that the Biden administration would agree on lifting sanctions on Iran financial institutions and oil exports as part of a temporary agreement. 

The second option that is under consideration by European parties to the JCPOA would be activation of the “trigger mechanism” in the UN Security Council Resolution 2231 backing up the JCPOA. This would restore all of the sanctions suspended by the JCPOA. France, UK, and Germany have recently held a meeting with 10 non-permanent members of the UN Security Council to discuss the “trigger or snap back mechanism.”

This scenario could have major risks as Iran may respond by withdrawing from the Nonproliferation Treaty which allows the IAEA to monitor its nuclear materials. Any U.S. or Israeli military strike would dramatically change Iran’s calculus of immediate security threats and therefore, would most likely pushIran towards building a nuclear weapon. The consequences of a war with Iran would be well beyond those resulting from the wars on Iraq and Afghanistan, at the same time the U.S. and Europe are engaged in a proxy war with Russia in Ukraine. Moreover, while current relations between the EU and Iran already are experiencingunprecedented tensions, any EU initiative to activate the snap back mechanism would be a nail to coffin of bilateral historical relations with Europe and the West.

The third and best option would be for Iran and the United States to resume direct negotiations, compromise on some confidence-building measures to contain tensions, revive the JCPOA based on the August 2022 draft agreement and carry out the prisoner exchange. Recently, in a modest step in this direction, on May 1, the IAEA began reinstalling cameras at certain nuclear facilities in Iran under an agreement the agency reached with Tehran in March 2023. Such confidence building measures are helpful if proportionality reciprocated by the U.S. and other world powers.

Simultaneously, to address regional issues, a dialogue should be started between Iran other Persian Gulf countries. The recent agreement to reestablish diplomatic relations between Iran and Saudi Arabia has created a golden opportunity to start a regional dialogue on collective security. Such a dialogue could result in agreements to cooperate on security of energy and maritime issues in the Persian Gulf, Arab-Persian rapprochement, and resolving the regional crises in Yemen, Lebanon, Syria, and Iraq.

“The JCPOA is widely regarded as a cornerstone of nuclear non-proliferation, and an example of what dialogue and diplomacy can achieve,” said United Nation Under-Secretary-General Rosemary DiCarlo. The JCPOA should be considered as a pathway toward rebuilding a peaceful regional security system in the Persian Gulf and the broader Middle East.

Five years after Trump’s strategic mistake of withdrawal from the JCPOA, President Biden should not let the quixotic quest for a better deal kill the JCPOA — which is most comprehensive non-proliferation agreement in history — thereby blocking opportunities for creating a new security and cooperation mechanism in the Persian Gulf enhancing sustainable peace and facilitating the path to a regional zone free of all weapons of mass destruction