UPDATE: I just found this nice piece about the Iranian thinking a few days after the breakdown. The rest down below is fading into background information.
From: Iran and the two Genevas in al-monitor.com…“There is no reason to be tormented,” an official source in Tehran told Al-Monitor. “Iran knows what it wants, and that’s what we are after.” The source explained that a deal on the nuclear front will help get other files in the region sorted. “The Syrian crisis wasn’t at the heart of the negotiations, but it was discussed thoroughly during side talks. Moreover, there was an American request that we discuss possible options whenever the nuclear deal is sealed, and that’s why some regional powers asked the French to put their spanners [wrench] into the talks, and here we are.”
The source elaborated on this last point, stressing that Syria was one of the reasons that a deal failed to be reached. “It’s not right to say that Israel and Saudi Arabia didn’t want a deal for the same reason. The Saudis’ main reason was Syria. They don’t want US-Iranian talks on Syria, because they know this will affect their vision there.” He added that this gave the French another good reason to interfere: “They wanted to please Israel, and now they could please the Saudis too, and the latter aren’t pleased for free. So they did whatever they could to [ensure] a deadlock, but this is temporary. Things will not continue this way.”
So what was discussed in Geneva, even if briefly?
“We can say there’s a genuine American will to end the conflict in Syria. At least, this is what our officials understood.” The source then looked at a paper to the side and read from it: “This is what we told everyone, including the Americans. Iran wants to see Syria without terrorists and the Syrian people deciding who they want to rule them. Very clear and concise.” Iranian officials, according to the source, explained to the Americans that there is no chance the rebels or anyone backing them can win on the battlefield. “From Damascus to Aleppo to Homs, the status quo is in favor of the regime, and wherever the regime is not in control, the ones who have the upper hand are al-Qaeda affiliates, so it’s not in anyone’s interest to see them winning. Geneva II is good for the opposition. It’s their chance to find themselves a real place in Syria, or it’s either the regime or the terrorists who will end them.”
The signs to a first stage agreement over the Iranian nuclear program were thwarted at the last minute by objections raised by the French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. Does this signify a detour to a dead end siding for the Peace Train? Of course not! Let’s dig in a little deeper to clarify the recent events.
Now this is one citizen’s unexpert narrative of what we are seeing, so please correct if you have better knowledge.
So it was all smiles. Everybody was very upbeat (except the usual suspects, natch). The logic of it has been looming there, like a fat hanging curveball, for years. The quickening that was going to lead to a swift pivot was palpable. Has the Ziosphere ever been shaken as badly as it being shaken this weekend? I’ve been following the I/P scene at Mondoweiss for years. Steady movement, but still drip, drip, drip. But the tone, substance and audience of Kerry’s remarks was a major gauntlet laid down. THAT means Obama senses that a tipping point is at hand in our relationship with Israel. As a nightflower, the fragrance of the lobby could be smelled everywhere but never seen. But it is being progressively exposed as to its true nature. Soon, the question of ‘which country are you loyal to, anyway?’ will carry a much greater sting when you are on the side of NOT making peace. So back to this weekend.
Since the Zionist ideology plays such a prominent role in the discussion, through Israeli actions and the hasbara that permeates our media and government, and the Israeli press is open to wide ranging perspectives, it’s a good place to gauge the reaction to the changing diplomatic scene.
Talks in Geneva between world powers and Iran ended early Sunday morning without a deal on Iran’s rogue nuclear program, after hitting a snag on Saturday when France questioned the terms of a proposed agreement. The sides agreed to meet again in Geneva on November 20, but at the level of “political directors” rather than foreign ministers.
Ashton appeared more disappointed than Zarif that the marathon negotiations had failed to yield an agreement. A relaxed and smiling Zarif, indeed, said it was “natural that when we start dealing with the details there would be differences of views, and we expected that.”
The issues of centrifuges, enrichment levels, and the Arak reactor are very close to being settled. The objections raised by the French FM are not substantive, but somebody had to speak up. I think this observer sees the REAL existential threat to Israel……
While everyone is talking about Iranian nuclear weapons the real Iranian threat is being overlooked. Not since the ancient times has Persia been such a powerful force in the region. From the Mountains of the Hindu Kush to the Mediterranean Sea the Ayatollahs either hold sway or have their forces fighting to impose the power of Iran upon the country’s populace.
Where once Assad was merely a useful dictator for the Iranians he is now firmly in their pocket, where once Iraq was an implacable enemy of Iran the Shi’ite armies are fighting a bloody sectarian civil war. 10 years ago there was one Western army sitting to Iran’s East and another sitting to the West, where American influence once lay Iranian influence has either taken over or is in the process of doing so. Here in Israel we now have Iranian backed forces to our North in Lebanon and the North East on the Golan Heights, they are also supporting Hamas in Gaza to the South West.
But it appears that Israel, Europe and the once all important United States are too busy talking about weapons of mass destruction to notice the placement of their adversary’s pieces on the global chessboard.
Many people are sophisticated enough to recognize the psychology of projection. We see it continuously with our brethren of the righteous legions in regions of this country. Here are some quotes from Israeli Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon. See if you can find the projection.
“Precisely at this time, when the regime in Tehran is in a dire economic situation and is worried about its survival, Western powers must not blink and reach an agreement with it that will provide it with breathing room for which it’s not required to give anything in return,” Ya’alon said in a press release Saturday.
“If one wants to prevent the use of force, one must know how to use tough diplomacy to bring Tehran to a point where it must decide between continued nuclear activity and its survival,” he went on.
“A deal now, under the current conditions is a historic mistake that will enable a war-mongering regime to carry on with its dangerous nuclear activities,” Ya’alon warned.
My bold above.
I just read, on the internet duh, that there was a previous potential agreement back in 2005 or so that Bush wouldn’t sign on to. In that one, Iran would have been limited to 3000 centrifuges (of an older model). Now they claim 19,000 and many are the newer, more efficient models. And they are spinning right now. At that time Iran had 1000 pounds of low enriched uranium. Now they have 10,000 pounds. So what exactly has been gained by NOT reaching an agreement?
Diplomacy now seems like the only game in town. After their last-minute success at avoiding an attack on Syria, the Americans apparently believe they can reach a similar achievement on the Iranian track. The possibility of Israeli military action against Iran may only come up again next spring, if attempts to reach a final agreement fail. Moreover, many experts say that Iran has made enough progress on its nuclear project that no significant damage would result from an Israeli attack, unless other countries participate.
If Netanyahu still has any options for pressuring the Americans, they lie in two indirect paths. One is through Congress, by prodding the bipartisan base of support for Israel into making life difficult for the administration, and the second is via the Palestinian channel, where the prime minister can thwart the efforts of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry to achieve progress in the bilateral talks, if Washington ignores Israel’s demands in the Iranian context.
But, in both of the cases, it is difficult to assess the strength of Israel’s bargaining position. Washington’s reluctance to pursue military action in Iran is broad and is shared by many in both major American political parties. As for the Palestinian issue, leaving aside Kerry’s awkward and superfluous threat about the outbreak of a third intifada, it is doubtful whether prolonged stagnation and diplomatic inaction serve Israel in the long run.
More Israeli reaction….
Strategic and Intelligence Affairs Ministers Yuval Steinitz spoke about the changing nature of the deal with Iran at a cultural event in Bat Yam on Saturday morning.
“The outline presented to Israel until several days ago, including during the strategic dialogue in Washington, looked substantially different from what is being discussed at this time,” he said.
Steinitz’s comment was backed by a senior Israeli official involved in the Iranian issue. “On Wednesday, something more acceptable was presented that we also didn’t love but could live with,” the official said. “Suddenly it changed to something much worse that included a much more significant lifting of sanctions. The feeling was that the Americans are much more eager to reach an agreement than the Iranians.”
Awww, poor babies. Looks like a bait and switch to me too. Here’s Haaretz in an editorial……
However, Israel’s strength depends on American and international backing. Without it, Israel cannot deal with either the Iranian threat or the other, closer, regional threats, especially when the United States has Israel’s back against the demand to examine and neutralize Israel’s nuclear potential.
Netanyahu can disagree with the American conception of how to best thwart Iran’s aspirations, but boasting of Israel’s ability to thumb its nose at the international diplomatic process is a dangerous threat in itself. It is a political boomerang, making its way directly back to Israel’s head.
Netanyahu should grit his teeth, curb statements that only widen the rift between Israel and the United States and let the talks with Iran pass the experimental phase. Meanwhile, he should harness his rhetorical abilities and his concerns in progressing the diplomatic process with the Palestinians.
Netanyahu, with his familial angst, doesn’t want to end up being the ultimate frayer…..
[EXCERPTS] There is one correct definition of the term frayer. It means “sucker” or “mark,” in the sense that somebody is a sucker if he goes along with the rules when nobody else is following them, or a mark if he’s a naive target for thieves. . .
. . . In Israeli life and society, the worst thing anybody can ever be is a frayer, and most people will do anything and everything they can at all times to avoid being a frayer. The only way to be certain at any given moment that you are not a frayer is to make somebody else a frayer.
