• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

The US-Iran nuclear talks are about to shift into high gear

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
93,583
Reaction score
81,659
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
The US-Iran nuclear talks are about to shift into high gear

Very interesting tidbit...

One of the major sticking points appears to be access to military sites amid lingering concerns about the possible military dimensions of the Islamic Republic's nuclear program. Tehran has always denied seeking to develop a nuclear bomb, saying its nuclear energy program is for civilian purposes only. But French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius warned on Wednesday that France would oppose a final nuclear accord unless it allowed inspections of military sites. An agreement "will not be accepted by France if it is not clear that verifications can be made at all Iranian facilities, including military sites," Fabius told parliament.

France has it right. In every nation with a nuclear weapons program, HEU, warheads, and ballistic missile components are under the physical control of the military. Excluding suspect Iranian military sites from IAEA inspections renders any verification of Iranian compliance with the NPT and a P5+1 Accord impossible.

From what I understand, Kerry's chief nuclear negotiator with Iran - Wendy Sherman - will leave her post on the June 30 deadline. Apparently, she's had enough of dealing with the Iranians.
 
I suspect failure is right around the corner, as it should be. There is too much that Iran will not agree to.
 
Simpleχity;1064664113 said:
The US-Iran nuclear talks are about to shift into high gear

Very interesting tidbit...



France has it right. In every nation with a nuclear weapons program, HEU, warheads, and ballistic missile components are under the physical control of the military. Excluding suspect Iranian military sites from IAEA inspections renders any verification of Iranian compliance with the NPT and a P5+1 Accord impossible.

From what I understand, Kerry's chief nuclear negotiator with Iran - Wendy Sherman - will leave her post on the June 30 deadline. Apparently, she's had enough of dealing with the Iranians.

Any idea how the P5+1 process works in terms of consensus? IOW can Frances no vote derail any deal?
 
Any idea how the P5+1 process works in terms of consensus? IOW can Frances no vote derail any deal?
The P5+1 internal process is not a matter of public record. However, public statements by Kerry and his allied opposites indicate that P5+1 consensus is the overarching internal goal. The absence of a consensus would strongly suggest that a specific formulation is considered gravely flawed. In addition, any of the P5 nations could veto a proposed Iranian nuclear deal placed before the UNSC.

When the initial framework deal was announced, the US/Iran/French "fact sheets" did not align. The French fact sheet specifically indicated that the IAEA will be able to visit any suspect site in Iran ... the so-called “anywhere, anytime” access provision. Rightly so IMO, the French consider this critical aspect non-negotiable.
 
Simpleχity;1064664329 said:
The P5+1 internal process is not a matter of public record. However, public statements by Kerry and his allied opposites indicate that P5+1 consensus is the overarching internal goal. The absence of a consensus would strongly suggest that a specific formulation is considered gravely flawed. In addition, any of the P5 nations could veto a proposed Iranian nuclear deal placed before the UNSC.

When the initial framework deal was announced, the US/Iran/French "fact sheets" did not align. The French fact sheet specifically indicated that the IAEA will be able to visit any suspect site in Iran ... the so-called “anywhere, anytime” access provision. Rightly so IMO, the French consider this critical aspect non-negotiable.

My guess is that there will be a deal. It will be ambiguous enough that both sides will claim victory. Sanctions will be lifted, companies will start the feeding frenzy of getting the Iranian economy back on its feet. Inspections will NOT be allowed at military sites or new sites built by Iran. Sanctions will NOT snapback as Obama promised. The next president will say this did not happen on my watch. Sounds like the North Korea playbook. Perhaps with another Clinton in the White House.
 
My guess is that there will be a deal. It will be ambiguous enough that both sides will claim victory. Sanctions will be lifted, companies will start the feeding frenzy of getting the Iranian economy back on its feet. Inspections will NOT be allowed at military sites or new sites built by Iran. Sanctions will NOT snapback as Obama promised.
If the above transpires, then there will be nuclear proliferation in the Sunni Arab Middle East. It is as simple as that.
 
Simpleχity;1064665203 said:
If the above transpires, then there will be nuclear proliferation in the Sunni Arab Middle East. It is as simple as that.

I agree. Not sure that the P5+1 cares.
 
My guess is that there will be a deal. It will be ambiguous enough that both sides will claim victory. Sanctions will be lifted, companies will start the feeding frenzy of getting the Iranian economy back on its feet. Inspections will NOT be allowed at military sites or new sites built by Iran. Sanctions will NOT snapback as Obama promised. The next president will say this did not happen on my watch. Sounds like the North Korea playbook. Perhaps with another Clinton in the White House.

That would be a very disappointing result.
 
I suspect failure is right around the corner, as it should be. There is too much that Iran will not agree to.

That cannot surprise anyone except maybe Obama. ;)
 
Simpleχity;1064664329 said:
The P5+1 internal process is not a matter of public record. However, public statements by Kerry and his allied opposites indicate that P5+1 consensus is the overarching internal goal. The absence of a consensus would strongly suggest that a specific formulation is considered gravely flawed. In addition, any of the P5 nations could veto a proposed Iranian nuclear deal placed before the UNSC.

When the initial framework deal was announced, the US/Iran/French "fact sheets" did not align. The French fact sheet specifically indicated that the IAEA will be able to visit any suspect site in Iran ... the so-called “anywhere, anytime” access provision. Rightly so IMO, the French consider this critical aspect non-negotiable.

So the question is whether Frances reservations are strong enough to force their veto at the UN. Wow, I remember a time when France not going along with the US earned them quite a bit of disdain. French fries became freedom fries, and the Dixie Chicks were roasted for acknowledging that France had a point with their opposition to Bush's designs on Iraq.
 
So the question is whether Frances reservations are strong enough to force their veto at the UN. Wow, I remember a time when France not going along with the US earned them quite a bit of disdain. French fries became freedom fries, and the Dixie Chicks were roasted for acknowledging that France had a point with their opposition to Bush's designs on Iraq.

If the French's reservations are strong enough to go public with then it's obvious they'll veto the agreement if it doesn't change.
Same goes for any of the other 4 permanent security council members.
An agreement that is not agreed on by all members of the council wouldn't even be declared.
 
If the French's reservations are strong enough to go public with then it's obvious they'll veto the agreement if it doesn't change.
Same goes for any of the other 4 permanent security council members.
An agreement that is not agreed on by all members of the council wouldn't even be declared.

We'll see!
 
We'll see!


I don't think enough people realize how important good Relations with Iran are to America's best interests or the degree to which the US could benefit Strategically, Militarily & Economically.

The consequences of losing Iran to co-operative arrangements with Russia, China & other regional parties are also more severe than many seem to realize.

Iran has the highest literacy rate of any country in the Islamic world & many countries outside of the Islamic world. It is also more interested in developing and manufacturing its own weapons in the future than buying from other sources. The level of sophistication in their products is significant for Russian customers & more advanced than Scud missiles

If the US allows Netanyahu's Fan Club in the US Government to scuttle negotiations with Iran, Russia & China are more than happy to enjoy those Strategic, Military & Economic benefits.
An informal alliance already exists between Iran, China & Russia & the West may already be facing weapons more sophisticated & effective than we realize. They all have more advanced military technology of their own plus they have an additional edge,..... access to US military secrets via Israel.

i.e. the Lavi Fighter Project and other stolen US technology, known & unknown:

“Israeli spies have done more harm and have damaged the United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined... They are the gravest threat to our national security.”

Admiral Bobby Inman
Former Deputy Director of the CIA

Briefly put, the story of the "Joint" US - Israel Lavi fighter project is one example in which Israel sold US developed technology to China which, in turn sold the basic elements of the design to Iran. Russia, too has benefited from Israeli espionage in the US.

Sadly, too few Americans realize the extent of or impact that unification of Central Asian & Eastern will have on Western/US interests in that region especially in the arms development race:

"The geopolitical environment is changing and it is not sympathetic to US interests. Not only has a Eurasian Economic Union been formed by Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia in the post-Soviet heart of Eurasia, but Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran — the Eurasian Triple Entente— have been in a long process of coming together politically, strategically, economically, diplomatically, and militarily." (1)

The US must do what it can to draw Iran in rather than propel it into the already significant Cent. Asia & Eastern organizations


Thanks














(1) “Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow?”
Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow? ? RT Op-Edge
 
Last edited:
Simpleχity;1064665203 said:
If the above transpires, then there will be nuclear proliferation in the Sunni Arab Middle East. It is as simple as that.

there is another effective solution
eliminate ALL nuclear warheads from the region
if israel relinquishes its nuclear weaponry, then iran will have no legitimate reason to pursue its own equivalent arsenal

but when does anyone engaged in negotiations expect agreement to proffered terms they would not accept for themselves?
will any of the 5+1 (notice the semantics, we cannot refer to it as the 6 nations) agree to the same terms of military site inspection for themselves that they would impose on iran? of course not. what rational nation - especially one subjected to the constant threats from the only nuclear power in the region - would allow those potential opponents access to its internal military apparatus? the 5+1 would not and neither should iran reasonably be expected to do so
 
I don't think enough people realize how important good Relations with Iran are to America's best interests or the degree to which the US could benefit Strategically, Militarily & Economically.

The consequences of losing Iran to co-operative arrangements with Russia, China & other regional parties are also more severe than many seem to realize.

Iran has the highest literacy rate of any country in the Islamic world & many countries outside of the Islamic world. It is also more interested in developing and manufacturing its own weapons in the future than buying from other sources. The level of sophistication in their products is significant for Russian customers & more advanced than Scud missiles

If the US allows Netanyahu's Fan Club in the US Government to scuttle negotiations with Iran, Russia & China are more than happy to enjoy those Strategic, Military & Economic benefits.
An informal alliance already exists between Iran, China & Russia & the West may already be facing weapons more sophisticated & effective than we realize. They all have more advanced military technology of their own plus they have an additional edge,..... access to US military secrets via Israel.

i.e. the Lavi Fighter Project and other stolen US technology, known & unknown:

“Israeli spies have done more harm and have damaged the United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined... They are the gravest threat to our national security.”

Admiral Bobby Inman
Former Deputy Director of the CIA

Briefly put, the story of the "Joint" US - Israel Lavi fighter project is one example in which Israel sold US developed technology to China which, in turn sold the basic elements of the design to Iran. Russia, too has benefited from Israeli espionage in the US.

Sadly, too few Americans realize the extent of or impact that unification of Central Asian & Eastern will have on Western/US interests in that region especially in the arms development race:

"The geopolitical environment is changing and it is not sympathetic to US interests. Not only has a Eurasian Economic Union been formed by Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia in the post-Soviet heart of Eurasia, but Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran — the Eurasian Triple Entente— have been in a long process of coming together politically, strategically, economically, diplomatically, and militarily." (1)

The US must do what it can to draw Iran in rather than propel it into the already significant Cent. Asia & Eastern organizations


Thanks














(1) “Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow?”
Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow? ? RT Op-Edge

Great points, I readily agree. USFP is clearly about a comparative few elitist wealthy people. It's not based upon what's good for you and I, let alone the Iranian citizens. I don't believe those people have any allegiances, don't see borders, and don't want a middle class. The points you made on Iran are correct, and Iran could just as easily be a friend and ally to the United States as they've been made into an enemy. But like you said, they reached out to Russia and China. As a matter of fact, there's a very obvious pattern over the last dozen years or so in which our policies, primarily in the Middle East are causing Russia and China to do the logical and forge tighter relations. I fail to see how that's going to be in my interest.
 
I suspect failure is right around the corner, as it should be. There is too much that Iran will not agree to.

It shouldn't be about what Iran is willing to do. We should simply be dictating to them what we will do whatever that is. Iran has us looking like fools.
 
It shouldn't be about what Iran is willing to do. We should simply be dictating to them what we will do whatever that is. Iran has us looking like fools.

Boy, the balancing of power and shifting to a Multi-polar world is going to really be a challenge accepting it by some.
 
Boy, the balancing of power and shifting to a Multi-polar world is going to really be a challenge accepting it by some.

I can't imagine why you would think I would support balanced power in the world.
 
I can't imagine why you would think I would support balanced power in the world.

But I don't, which is why I said that.
 
I don't think enough people realize how important good Relations with Iran are to America's best interests or the degree to which the US could benefit Strategically, Militarily & Economically.

The consequences of losing Iran to co-operative arrangements with Russia, China & other regional parties are also more severe than many seem to realize.

Iran has the highest literacy rate of any country in the Islamic world & many countries outside of the Islamic world. It is also more interested in developing and manufacturing its own weapons in the future than buying from other sources. The level of sophistication in their products is significant for Russian customers & more advanced than Scud missiles

If the US allows Netanyahu's Fan Club in the US Government to scuttle negotiations with Iran, Russia & China are more than happy to enjoy those Strategic, Military & Economic benefits.
An informal alliance already exists between Iran, China & Russia & the West may already be facing weapons more sophisticated & effective than we realize. They all have more advanced military technology of their own plus they have an additional edge,..... access to US military secrets via Israel.

i.e. the Lavi Fighter Project and other stolen US technology, known & unknown:

“Israeli spies have done more harm and have damaged the United States more than the intelligence agents of all other countries on earth combined... They are the gravest threat to our national security.”

Admiral Bobby Inman
Former Deputy Director of the CIA

Briefly put, the story of the "Joint" US - Israel Lavi fighter project is one example in which Israel sold US developed technology to China which, in turn sold the basic elements of the design to Iran. Russia, too has benefited from Israeli espionage in the US.

Sadly, too few Americans realize the extent of or impact that unification of Central Asian & Eastern will have on Western/US interests in that region especially in the arms development race:

"The geopolitical environment is changing and it is not sympathetic to US interests. Not only has a Eurasian Economic Union been formed by Armenia, Belarus, Kazakhstan, and Russia in the post-Soviet heart of Eurasia, but Beijing, Moscow, and Tehran — the Eurasian Triple Entente— have been in a long process of coming together politically, strategically, economically, diplomatically, and militarily." (1)

The US must do what it can to draw Iran in rather than propel it into the already significant Cent. Asia & Eastern organizations


Thanks














(1) “Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow?”
Did a Chinese-Russian-Iranian coalition opposing NATO debut in Moscow? ? RT Op-Edge

That is quite a good description of a sliver of potential developments. Thing is that it is not really the main issue, which is the shift in relative economic power and the resulting effects on security. There is nothing the USA can do to prevent that and it is more a question of how to deal with it and prevent a highly likely world war.
 
That is quite a good description of a sliver of potential developments. Thing is that it is not really the main issue, which is the shift in relative economic power and the resulting effects on security. There is nothing the USA can do to prevent that and it is more a question of how to deal with it and prevent a highly likely world war.

Hey! We agree joG.
 
Back
Top Bottom