Foreign ministers arrive amid crucial weekend for Iran nuclear talks

Montecresto said:

Fair enough, we'll wait to see. Still, whatever the P5+1 agree on, is a P5+1 deal, and not a Kerry deal.

Click to expand...

P5+1 - Iran deal. We agree on that.

donsutherland1 said:

We'll see what happens. I suspected that the framework agreement could be reached a few days late. Russia's position, which runs counter to those of the Western states involved in the talks, isn't all that surprising. Russia's interests with respect to Iran are not symmetrical to the Western ones. An immediate end to sanctions could boost Russian commerce and given Russia's current economic challenges, Russia would like to achieve that outcome.

Click to expand...

They changed it up from framework agreement to the new phase. Framework understanding.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/inter...an-nuke-talks-fall-short-march-31-2015-a.html

Montecresto said:

I won't disagree with that, and would point out that that would frame many a historical positions that the US has backed for similar reasons, that may not have been all that good for others though. It appears that that's what nations do, watch out for their own interests. That said, I seriously doubt that Russia, or China consider a nuclear armed Iran is a good thing.

Click to expand...

We agree that nations seek to protect/advance their interests, as they should. Just so it is clear, in no way am I suggesting that Russia's position vis-a-vis the complete lifting of sanctions on Iran should an agreement be reached suggests that Russia favors a nuclear-armed Iran. There is no indication that it does. The same holds true for the remainder of the P5 + 1 countries. There is no indication that they favor a nuclear-armed Iran or even would accept such an outcome.

MMC said:

They changed it up from framework agreement to the new phase. Framework understanding.

http://www.debatepolitics.com/inter...an-nuke-talks-fall-short-march-31-2015-a.html

Click to expand...

That's part of the papering over of differences where each side has sufficient flexibility to interpret things as it sees fit. "Understanding" is a less exacting term than "agreement" in the realm of diplomacy.

Montecresto said:

There is China, Russia, France, the UK and Germany setting at this table. It's not all on Kerry's back.

Click to expand...

Until a few days ago when other ministers arrived, Kerry and Earnest Monitz (US Energy Secretary) were the chief negotiators for the P5+1.

A good portion of this is indeed on Kerry's back.

donsutherland1 said:

That's part of the papering over of differences where each side has sufficient flexibility to interpret things as it sees fit. "Understanding" is a less exacting term than "agreement" in the realm of diplomacy.

Click to expand...

Well, I will let you read it in all its glory. You can weigh in there. As that is what it will be. I doubt Congress will do anything about it, the Demos found a word they can play off of. So now all those that were ready to over-ride will back off. Even Menendez.

Simpleχity;1064479900 said:

Until a few days ago when other ministers arrived, Kerry and Earnest Monitz (US Energy Secretary) were the chief negotiators for the P5+1.

A good portion of this is indeed on Kerry's back.

Click to expand...

Sorry but it wouldn't matter if Kerry negotiated its entirety if Russia and China, Germany, the UK and France sign it too, it's a P5+1 agreement.

Montecresto said:

Sorry but it wouldn't matter if Kerry negotiated its entirety if Russia and China, Germany, the UK and France sign it too, it's a P5+1 agreement.

Click to expand...

I didn't say it would. I said that Kerry did most of the heavy negotiating (with Monitz) and ergo, he shoulders the proportional responsibility.

Simpleχity;1064480561 said:

I didn't say it would. I said that Kerry did most of the heavy negotiating (with Monitz) and ergo, he shoulders the proportional responsibility.

Click to expand...

Wrong. Again, if he negotiated its entirety, on behalf of the P5+1, and they agree to it and sign on, it's a P5+1 agreement. Likewise, if Lavrov negotiated the entire deal, and the US, UK, France, Germany and China all agreed with it and signed on, it would be a P5+1 agreement, Lavrov shouldering no more or less responsibility than his counterparts in the other participating countries.

Strange, no Russia, China, France, UK, or German flag at the negotiating table. The P5+1 is responsible technically, but Kerry is responsible pragmatically.

It's just asinine to suggest others aren't involved and have very real concerns in the outcome of this.

Today, Beijing is weighing several key interests as it frames its position in Lausanne – its energy security, (nine percent of China’s oil imports came from Iran last year), its relationship with Washington, and Beijing’s image as a responsible world power.

Beyond these interests, says Yin Gang, a Middle East expert at the Chinese Academy of Social Sciences, “China has a duty to join the search for a political solution,” as a permanent member of the UN Security Council with a desire to see a calmer Middle East.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Asia...ks-Can-China-keep-negotiations-on-track-video

China's intimately involved with skin in the game.

However, as China’s energy, economic, and other stakes in the Middle East grow rapidly, U.S. and Chinese interests in regional stability are quickly becoming aligned. Working together to promote a final deal on Iran’s nuclear program is a good opportunity for the two countries to demonstrate that—as their top leaders have envisioned—they can indeed place their relationship on a more cooperative footing and achieve mutual benefits in the process. This potential bilateral cooperation also dovetails with the concept of a new type of great power relationship that Xi has articulated. The Chinese leader sees this new relationship as a way to counter predictions of inevitable confrontation between China and the United States and instead foster ties built on mutual respect and benefits.

Read more at: China and the Iranian Nuclear Negotiations-Carnegie-Tsinghua Center - Carnegie Endowment for International Peace

Montecresto said:

It's just asinine to suggest others aren't involved and have very real concerns in the outcome of this.

Click to expand...

It's asinine to suggest the foreign ministers of Russia, China, France, UK, and Germany were in Lusanne doing the heavy lifting.

Their role was limited to the final 36 hours. Last minute Crisis Managers.

Simpleχity;1064480942 said:

It's asinine to suggest the foreign ministers of Russia, China, France, UK, and Germany were in Lusanne doing the heavy lifting.

Their role was limited to the final 36 hours. Last minute Crisis Managers.

Click to expand...

Dude! China's been involved in the negotiations for years and has a documented (but I see ignored by you) interest in Iran not having nuclear weapons. Thanks for acknowledging that Kerry's been doing heavy lifting, but look, this is not a unilateral ambition, much as you feel the need to frame it so.