Boeing's Role in the Iran Nuclear Deal Must Be Investigated

A good business deal should not be built upon a potential existential threat to the U.S., our beloved country.  With Boeing involved so soon after the 2015 P5+1 deal with Iran (more commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal) was completed, it is reasonable to ask if this nongovernmental entity played an informal, yet crucial, role behind the scenes in the P5+1 negotiations.  Is it ethical or even legal for a non-governmental entity to have such a role?  Is it possible that "the deal" was pushed through without being considered a treaty requiring two-thirds approval by the U.S. Senate in part or totally because of the involvement of Boeing?

Let's consider what has happened since "the deal" was completed.  Only three jetliners of the Boeing order for 80 planes to Iran have so far been delivered.  There are questions about what will happen with the sanctions as Trump reviews the deal.  One report says the deal will go through anyway; another report says it will not.  Iran undoubtedly despises the infidel Boeing executive elite, but Boeing knows that the mullahs of Iran need those planes if they want to participate in the prosperity of the elite megalomaniacs running our world.

What about the other players in the P5+1 backing the transfer of so many billions to Iran, which billions make possible the purchase of these jetliners?

We see that Russia has accelerated its program of designing jets for Boeing.  There are multiple design centers in Russia.  Further, Boeing is deeply involved with the design of jetliners in both Russia and Ukraine.  In fact, recently a number of Ukrainian designers of jets were reportedly unhappy with working in Moscow and transferred back to become part of a huge design center in Ukraine.  Boeing kept a low profile after this move to Ukraine in order not to offend Russia, which is a big supplier of titanium needed for the production of jetliners.  But get this: the Boeing company in Ukraine is a wholly owned subsidiary of two U.S. Boeing companies!  Boeing has a global penetration that is truly incredible.

Boeing itself makes no attempt to conceal its longstanding and extensive relationship with Russia going back to long before the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.  At its website, Boeing states: "The Boeing Company has maintained a cooperative relationship with Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) since the era of the former Soviet Union[.] ... Boeing and Russia have long-term partnerships in multiple areas, including aviation, metallurgy, space, engineering and information technology (IT)[.] ... Boeing employees in Russia/CIS work in airplane and services sales, marketing, legal, communications and finance at the Boeing Design Center, the Technical Research Center in Moscow and in field services at various sites."  Boeing prides itself on having a "relationship" going back even to the era of full-blown communism in USSR.  Does this not raise many red flags about the priorities of this business?  About its concern for our citizens as well as citizens of other countries?

Let's look briefly at Boeing's relationship with Great Britain, another one of the P5+1 countries.  Boeing reports, "Today the UK remains a critically important market, supplier base and a source of some of the world's most inventive technology[.] ... In 2016 Boeing spent £2.1 billion with more than 250 UK suppliers."  Do you think Great Britain wants to do anything to jeopardize so many billions of pounds sterling of cash flow into their country?

We can in turn consider the role of Boeing in the German economy.  Boeing spent nearly $1.3 billion in Germany in 2016 and has 600 employees there, and another 12,000 depend on income from supplying Boeing.  Further, as recently as Nov. 2017, Boeing signed a massive deal with a German company to provide parts for Chinook heavy-duty helicopters.  Do I have to connect the dots?  Money from the Iranian deal is helping fund Boeing expansion in Ukraine, Russia, Germany, and Great Britain.

What about France and China, the remaining two players in the six-country deal with Iran?  As recently as November of this past year, Boeing has agreed to sell $37 billion's worth of jets to the People's Republic of China.  Even as early as 2009, Boeing was boasting that it had a robust business relationship with the PRC and had sold it over 800 jets.  And while I do not wish to shock any of the readers of this piece, it must be asked if you think any business on a large scale moves forward via governmental approvals in the PRC without tremendous amounts of bribery.

Of the six countries involved in the deal with Iran, it appears that France has the weakest relationship with Boeing with only 40 Boeing employees, and France is the world headquarters for Boeing's largest competitor, Airbus.  Therefore, we are not surprised to learn that France's response to the deal with Iran was the most guarded and tentative of all the P5+1 countries.

So, if this deal centered on the role of Boeing in dealing with the six countries, why was the U.S. the key country in the negotiations?  Why were we the key to success for all parties?  The answer is this: we were the key players in the P5+1 deal because we had all that Iranian money frozen since 1979, when we froze Iranian assets after our people were held hostage by the new government of Ayatollah Khomeini?  That money would then be used to incentivize Boeing not only to provide planes for Iran, but to expand its operations in the other negotiating countries.

Since Boeing so far has proved to be the largest potential beneficiary of the Iran deal, and is a company with pervasive international financial clout, is it not reasonable to assume that Boeing was the eighth player in this complex negotiation: P5+1+Iran+Boeing?  The U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations should be convened to investigate any possible participation by Boeing in the negotiations leading up to the deal which jeopardizes the future security of the USA, Europe, Israel, and even other Middle Eastern Arab-Muslim countries.  However, the reader should know that the Chair of the Senate Committee is Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who was instrumental in not having "the deal" voted on in the Senate as a treaty.  Therefore, it would be best to write to Rep. Ed Boyce (R-Calif.) to promote these needed hearings.  Boeing is a non-governmental entity and is not authorized in any way to protect our citizens from enemies foreign or domestic.

A good business deal should not be built upon a potential existential threat to the U.S., our beloved country.  With Boeing involved so soon after the 2015 P5+1 deal with Iran (more commonly known as the Iran nuclear deal) was completed, it is reasonable to ask if this nongovernmental entity played an informal, yet crucial, role behind the scenes in the P5+1 negotiations.  Is it ethical or even legal for a non-governmental entity to have such a role?  Is it possible that "the deal" was pushed through without being considered a treaty requiring two-thirds approval by the U.S. Senate in part or totally because of the involvement of Boeing?

Let's consider what has happened since "the deal" was completed.  Only three jetliners of the Boeing order for 80 planes to Iran have so far been delivered.  There are questions about what will happen with the sanctions as Trump reviews the deal.  One report says the deal will go through anyway; another report says it will not.  Iran undoubtedly despises the infidel Boeing executive elite, but Boeing knows that the mullahs of Iran need those planes if they want to participate in the prosperity of the elite megalomaniacs running our world.

What about the other players in the P5+1 backing the transfer of so many billions to Iran, which billions make possible the purchase of these jetliners?

We see that Russia has accelerated its program of designing jets for Boeing.  There are multiple design centers in Russia.  Further, Boeing is deeply involved with the design of jetliners in both Russia and Ukraine.  In fact, recently a number of Ukrainian designers of jets were reportedly unhappy with working in Moscow and transferred back to become part of a huge design center in Ukraine.  Boeing kept a low profile after this move to Ukraine in order not to offend Russia, which is a big supplier of titanium needed for the production of jetliners.  But get this: the Boeing company in Ukraine is a wholly owned subsidiary of two U.S. Boeing companies!  Boeing has a global penetration that is truly incredible.

Boeing itself makes no attempt to conceal its longstanding and extensive relationship with Russia going back to long before the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991.  At its website, Boeing states: "The Boeing Company has maintained a cooperative relationship with Russia and the Commonwealth of Independent States (CIS) since the era of the former Soviet Union[.] ... Boeing and Russia have long-term partnerships in multiple areas, including aviation, metallurgy, space, engineering and information technology (IT)[.] ... Boeing employees in Russia/CIS work in airplane and services sales, marketing, legal, communications and finance at the Boeing Design Center, the Technical Research Center in Moscow and in field services at various sites."  Boeing prides itself on having a "relationship" going back even to the era of full-blown communism in USSR.  Does this not raise many red flags about the priorities of this business?  About its concern for our citizens as well as citizens of other countries?

Let's look briefly at Boeing's relationship with Great Britain, another one of the P5+1 countries.  Boeing reports, "Today the UK remains a critically important market, supplier base and a source of some of the world's most inventive technology[.] ... In 2016 Boeing spent £2.1 billion with more than 250 UK suppliers."  Do you think Great Britain wants to do anything to jeopardize so many billions of pounds sterling of cash flow into their country?

We can in turn consider the role of Boeing in the German economy.  Boeing spent nearly $1.3 billion in Germany in 2016 and has 600 employees there, and another 12,000 depend on income from supplying Boeing.  Further, as recently as Nov. 2017, Boeing signed a massive deal with a German company to provide parts for Chinook heavy-duty helicopters.  Do I have to connect the dots?  Money from the Iranian deal is helping fund Boeing expansion in Ukraine, Russia, Germany, and Great Britain.

What about France and China, the remaining two players in the six-country deal with Iran?  As recently as November of this past year, Boeing has agreed to sell $37 billion's worth of jets to the People's Republic of China.  Even as early as 2009, Boeing was boasting that it had a robust business relationship with the PRC and had sold it over 800 jets.  And while I do not wish to shock any of the readers of this piece, it must be asked if you think any business on a large scale moves forward via governmental approvals in the PRC without tremendous amounts of bribery.

Of the six countries involved in the deal with Iran, it appears that France has the weakest relationship with Boeing with only 40 Boeing employees, and France is the world headquarters for Boeing's largest competitor, Airbus.  Therefore, we are not surprised to learn that France's response to the deal with Iran was the most guarded and tentative of all the P5+1 countries.

So, if this deal centered on the role of Boeing in dealing with the six countries, why was the U.S. the key country in the negotiations?  Why were we the key to success for all parties?  The answer is this: we were the key players in the P5+1 deal because we had all that Iranian money frozen since 1979, when we froze Iranian assets after our people were held hostage by the new government of Ayatollah Khomeini?  That money would then be used to incentivize Boeing not only to provide planes for Iran, but to expand its operations in the other negotiating countries.

Since Boeing so far has proved to be the largest potential beneficiary of the Iran deal, and is a company with pervasive international financial clout, is it not reasonable to assume that Boeing was the eighth player in this complex negotiation: P5+1+Iran+Boeing?  The U.S. House Committee on Foreign Affairs and the U.S. Senate Committee on Foreign Relations should be convened to investigate any possible participation by Boeing in the negotiations leading up to the deal which jeopardizes the future security of the USA, Europe, Israel, and even other Middle Eastern Arab-Muslim countries.  However, the reader should know that the Chair of the Senate Committee is Sen. Bob Corker (R-Tenn.), who was instrumental in not having "the deal" voted on in the Senate as a treaty.  Therefore, it would be best to write to Rep. Ed Boyce (R-Calif.) to promote these needed hearings.  Boeing is a non-governmental entity and is not authorized in any way to protect our citizens from enemies foreign or domestic.