As part of what appears to be a concerted campaign in the Right-wing and pro-Israeli media outlets in the US against US nuclear negotiations with Iran, which have a consistent theme of portraying the Obama administration as somehow "caving in" to Iranian demands, the Wall Street Journal today goes far out of its way to misrepresent the state of affairs in an article about President Rouhani's speech at the UN.
The article is entitled "Iran Makes the Rules. Tehran holds firm while the U.S. keeps making nuclear concessions."
Any reader who has followed the news would at this point wonder what "concessions" the US has been making, since there are none other than not engaging in courses of action (such as bombing Iran) that are illegal anyway. But then the article proceeds to claim,
"[Rouhani] also claimed that Iran had honored its obligations under the interim nuclear agreement. That's despite a report this month from the International Atomic Energy Agency noting that Tehran continued to stymie its efforts to investigate the "possible military dimensions" of Iran's nuclear program."
There are two factual problems here that the Wall Street Journal misrepresents. First of all, the "claim" that Iran has honored its obligations under the Joint Plan of Action, is actually verifiable. In fact, independent arms control organizations have done so, and their conclusion is clearly that Iran has either completed or is complying with each and every one of the requirements of the Joint Plan of Action.
Secondly, what the Wall Street Journal doesn't tell you is that the timetable for the completion of the requirements of the Joint Plan of Action is separate from the IAEA's investigation of the so-called "Possible Military Dimensions" issue. So the fact that the IAEA continues to claim that the PMD issue is outstanding, has no bearing on the Joint Plan of Action.
Of course, a bigger issue that the Wall Street Journal leaves out is the fact that the "Possible Military Dimension" (formerly called "Alleged Studies") are considered even by nuclear experts to be manufactured accusations which have repeatedly been shown to be fraudulent. Formerly, the IAEA had refused to endorse these claims because they were "insufficiently verified." For that, and for that the IAEA Director Elbaradei was accused of "censoring" information pressured by the US (Israel went as far as to accuse him of being "an Iranian agent.") But after the US-backed Amano was installed as the head of the IAEA, the issue was politicized further as he released the IAEA's so-called "Secret Annex" which supposedly detailed these "possible military dimensions" to Iran's nuclear program -- allegations which actual nuclear experts even former IAEA weapons inspectors who reviewed the information considered "thin" and shoddy.
Read more about former IAEA director Elbaradei's views of these allegations in his book, Age of Deception: