Instead of being deported to the United States because of Iranian ‘threats’ against President Donald Trump and others, the U.S.S. Tensions were high in early 2021 after the Pentagon finally decided to pull the Nimitz aircraft carrier out of the Gulf. According to senior U.S. officials, AFP and other international media.
“We have ordered the USS Nimitz to suspend its restructuring because of recent threats by Iranian leaders against (current) President Donald Trump and other US government officials,” US Secretary of Defense Christopher Miller said in a statement. Released Sunday night.
He said the aircraft carrier would “remain stationary now” in the Gulf, adding that “no one should question the resolution of the United States.” A few days ago, Miller announced the return of the USS Nimitz, which would return ‘directly’ to the United States, according to a December 31 statement. According to US officials quoted by the New York Times, the decision was seen as a signal of an “expansion” for Tehran to avoid conflict.
Nimitz has been patrolling the Gulf waters since late November to protect the withdrawal of U.S. troops from Afghanistan. If the Pentagon chief does not mention the nature of the threats, tensions between the United States and Iran have escalated due to the Trump administration’s “maximum pressure” campaign against Tehran.
The anti-US protests in Baghdad on Sunday have marked thousands of supporters of pro-Iranian paramilitary forces since the US assassination of Iranian General Qasim Cholaimani and his Iraqi lieutenant.
EU issues stern warning to Iran
The European Union (EU) has expressed dissatisfaction with the 20% increase in uranium enrichment previously announced by Iran. The EU warns that this could be a “significant departure from its nuclear obligations” with “serious non-proliferation consequences” under the Vienna Convention.
EU spokesman Peter Stano told a daily press conference in Brussels that if Tehran began to enrich uranium to 20% – which would exceed the 3.67% limit on the 2015 nuclear deal – it would be a “significant departure” from the obligations made in the 2015 nuclear deal.