Thursday, March 26, 2015

Eye on Iran: U.S., Iran Resume Talks on Preliminary Nuclear Deal as Deadline Looms






Join UANI  
 Like us on Facebook Follow us on Twitter View our videos on YouTube
   
Top Stories

Reuters: "The United States and Iran resumed negotiations on Thursday aimed at clinching a nuclear deal before a March 31 deadline, and officials close to the talks said some kind of preliminary agreement between Tehran and six powers was possible... U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Energy Secretary Ernest Moniz met their Iranian counterparts, Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Atomic Energy Organization chief Ali Akbar Salehi in the Swiss city of Lausanne... French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius will go to Lausanne on Saturday to join the talks, a ministry spokesman said... 'The aim is to get a sort of memorandum of understanding that would be enough for Americans to take to Congress and the Iranians to keep to Khamenei's demand,' said a Western diplomat involved in the talks. 'The aim is to get something out by Sunday, although the deadline is March 31,' the official added. The main obstacle, Western officials say, remains Iran's refusal to compromise on sanctions, research and development and other issues." http://t.uani.com/1Bs0GgW

Guardian: "Even if a deal is agreed during this week's international negotiations on key elements of Iran's nuclear programme, much of it may be kept secret until a final deadline at the end of June, a senior European official has said... A senior European official said: 'This is not the endgame this week. There will not be an agreement by the end of this week, because the agreement will only be done when all the technical details are down and that is quite a lot.' The official pointed instead to the greater importance of a second deadline, at the end of June, by which all the fine print and annexes of an agreement are required to be completed. The text on of that final agreement is still being worked on and 60% of it is said still to be in brackets, meaning it has not been agreed. 'What we'd like to achieve by the end of this week is an understanding on the key issues, key parameters,' the official said. However, it is unclear how much of that 'understanding' would be made public, lest it tie negotiators' hands for the remaining three months of bargaining and draw a backlash from hardliners in Tehran and Washington. One possibility is for a vague 'fact-sheet' to be issued in public, and Kerry provide more details in a closed session of Congress. If the framework deal is reached in the coming days, foreign ministers from the other negotiating parties - the UK, France, Germany, Russia and China - are expected to converge on Lausanne for a formal declaration and public handshakes. But it would be difficult to stage such an event without releasing some details of what had been agreed." http://t.uani.com/1GZlxg8

Reuters: "The United States wants major powers to reach a detailed political understanding with Iran by March 31 to clear the path for a long-term nuclear accord, a senior U.S. official said, while hinting that Washington could be flexible on its format. Speaking to reporters traveling with Secretary of State John Kerry to a new round of talks in the Swiss city of Lausanne, the senior State Department official added that Washington would not rush to complete an agreement just because there was a deadline... 'Any political understanding needs to address in some way all of the elements of a final agreement,' the official said late on Wednesday. 'We do not know what form this will take,' the official said. 'We have always said it needs to have specifics. We will need to communicate as many specifics as possible in some form or fashion (to the public and U.S. Congress).' ... 'If we get to March 31 and don't have a political understanding, we will have to evaluate where we are,' the U.S. official said. 'We will have to look at what we think the path forward is and we will make decisions based on that.'" http://t.uani.com/1BrYx4H

   
Nuclear Program & Negotiations

Bloomberg: "Negotiators aim to conclude a framework agreement over Iran's nuclear program by March 29, diplomats said as talks in Switzerland resumed after a week-long break. Reaching an understanding by Sunday is a best-case scenario and the sides may be forced to go until March 31, according to three European and U.S. officials, who asked not to be named in line with diplomatic rules. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry is provisionally scheduled to attend an event with President Barack Obama and Senate leaders on March 30." http://t.uani.com/1GZkE7o

Reuters: "Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has begun to signal that Israel could resign itself to an Iranian nuclear deal that would leave its enemy with some uranium enrichment capability, a compromise he has long opposed. The shift seems surprising given Netanyahu's contentious speech to the U.S. Congress earlier this month in which he argued against world powers letting Tehran keep thousands of uranium centrifuges and remain on possible course to a bomb. But faced with Western impatience and White House wrath over the calls to avoid a 'very bad deal' - while offering no detailed alternative of his own - Netanyahu and his envoys are now engaging with negotiators on the small print of what Israel hopes will be a better agreement. Almost lost in the prime minister's March 3 denunciations in Congress was a line urging U.S. President Barack Obama to seek a 'better deal' that 'Israel and its neighbors may not like, but with which we could live, literally'... Instead, officials say, Israel has been challenging Western powers on specific details of a deal, such as strong technical safeguards and extending the breakout time... A European diplomat confirmed this was now the Israelis' focus, saying that although they 'are clearly not fans of the one-year (breakout) they are principally concerned by research and development and want the most restrictions possible on it. The message is simple: stop all enrichment possibilities.'" http://t.uani.com/1FL8eml

WSJ: "As President Barack Obama gets closer to a nuclear agreement with Iran, his handling of other foreign policy challenges could complicate his effort to convince Congress that a deal with Tehran would be effective. A key part of the White House sales pitch is the promise that if Iran does not comply with the terms of an agreement, the president would take other action to prevent Tehran from acquiring a nuclear weapon. Mr. Obama has made similar promises in dealing with Russia and Syria. The White House continues to threaten Russia with additional 'costs,' while President Vladimir Putin continues to defy the West. And Mr. Obama's decision in 2013 to back off of his threat of military strikes against Syria in retaliation for President Bashar al-Assad's use of chemical weapons raised doubt among U.S. allies and in Congress about whether he means what he says." http://t.uani.com/1NcrVnT

AFP: "Failure to secure a deal with Iran could mean a nuclear arms race in the Middle East, the foreign secretary warned in comments released on Thursday. 'I remain clear that no deal is better than a bad deal. But we should also be clear-eyed about the alternative,' Foreign Secretary Philip Hammond said in a speech in London. 'No deal means no restrictions on enrichment, no restrictions on research and development, and no independent monitoring or verification. It means a fundamentally more unstable Middle East, with the prospect of a nuclear arms race in the region.' ... 'So now is the time, with our key allies, to build on the recent momentum, to press Iran where differences remain, and to strain every sinew to get a deal over the finishing line,' Hammond said. 'The door to a nuclear deal is open, but Iran must now step through it.'" http://t.uani.com/1HKLnbb

WSJ: "Talks over Iran's nuclear program have hit a stumbling block a week before a key deadline because Tehran has failed to cooperate with a United Nations probe into whether it tried to build atomic weapons in the past, say people close to the negotiations. In response, these people say, the U.S. and its diplomatic partners are revising their demands on Iran to address these concerns before they agree to finalize a nuclear deal, which would repeal U.N. sanctions against the country. 'Progress has been very limited,' Yukiya Amano, who heads the U.N.'s International Atomic Energy Agency, told The Wall Street Journal this week. 'No more new issues' have been addressed... Iran's refusal to implement the IAEA work plan threatens to undermine the prospects for this comprehensive agreement, say diplomats involved in the talks." http://t.uani.com/1Bs4Rct

Sanctions Enforcement

Reuters: "The U.S. Justice Department said on Wednesday that a subsidiary of Schlumberger Oilfield Holdings had pleaded guilty to violating U.S. sanctions related to Iran and Sudan and would pay a $237.2 million fine. The oil well manufacturing company also agreed to a three-year period of corporate probation, during which it will cease all operations in Iran and Syria and hire an independent consultant to review its policies on complying with sanctions. 'For years, in a variety of ways, this foreign company facilitated trade with Iran and Sudan from Sugar Land, Texas,' U.S. Attorney Ronald C. Machen, Jr. said. 'Today's announcement should send a clear message to all global companies with a U.S. presence: Whether your employees are from the U.S. or abroad, when they are in the United States, they will abide by our laws or you will be held accountable,' Machen warned. In a statement, Schlumberger said it voluntarily ceased oilfield operation in Iran as of the second quarter of 2013 and said it has ceased oilfield operations in Sudan as of the plea agreement." http://t.uani.com/1CdxOwq

Iraq Crisis

WashPost: "U.S. warplanes began striking Islamic State forces in and around the Iraqi city of Tikrit on Wednesday, drawing the United States directly into a battle that has pitted the militants against Iraqi forces dominated by Iranian-backed militias. Pentagon officials said that the Iraqi government had requested the assistance as the fight for Tikrit stalled as it moved into its fourth week. They said initial targeting for the strikes will be aided by U.S.-led coalition surveillance aircraft that recently began flying over the city, 110 miles northwest of Baghdad." http://t.uani.com/1GZnqJD

Yemen Crisis

Reuters: "Warplanes from Saudi Arabia and Arab allies struck Shi'ite Muslim rebels fighting to oust Yemen's president on Thursday, a gamble by the world's top oil exporter to check Iranian influence in its backyard without direct military backing from Washington. Riyadh's rival Iran denounced the assault on the Houthi militia group, which it backs... Saudi-owned al-Arabiya TV reported that the kingdom was contributing 100 warplanes to operation 'Storm of Resolve' and more than 85 were provided by the United Arab Emirates, Qatar, Bahrain, Kuwait, Jordan, Morocco and Sudan... A United Arab Emirates official expressed Gulf Arab concerns about Iranian influence in Yemen. 'The strategic change in the region benefits Iran and we cannot be silent about the fact that the Houthis carry their banner,' UAE Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Anwar Mohammed Gargash wrote on Twitter." http://t.uani.com/1EXHZ9i

LAT: "Secret files held by Yemeni security forces that contain details of American intelligence operations in the country have been looted by Iran-backed militia leaders, exposing names of confidential informants and plans for U.S.-backed counter-terrorism strikes, U.S. officials say. U.S. intelligence officials believe additional files were handed directly to Iranian advisors by Yemeni officials who have sided with the Houthi militias that seized control of Sana, the capital, in September, which led the U.S.-backed president to flee to Aden. For American intelligence networks in Yemen, the damage has been severe. Until recently, U.S. forces deployed in Yemen had worked closely with President Abdu Rabu Mansour Hadi's government to track and kill Al Qaeda operatives, and President Obama had hailed Yemen last fall as a model for counter-terrorism operations elsewhere." http://t.uani.com/19ndPRr

Opinion & Analysis

Amb. Dennis Ross & Eric Edelman in JINSA: "After two renewed negotiating deadlines and more than a year of talks, momentum appears to be building for a comprehensive agreement on Iran's nuclear program. Specific parameters may remain unresolved, but the emerging contours of a prospective deal raise several fundamental concerns that must be addressed by Congress and the Obama Administration before there could be any assurance it would further U.S. national security interests. Given the information currently available, a comprehensive agreement building on the JPA clearly would fall significantly short of this Task Force's baselines for an acceptable comprehensive agreement, as spelled out in previous reports. Multiple issues must still be clarified, resolved and strengthened before the basic tenability of the prospective agreement could be assessed properly. The Obama Administration must explain how it envisions imposing restrictions on Iran's nuclear program to prevent it from obtaining an undetectable nuclear weapons capability. Before considering taking any agreement to the United Nations, the Administration must address very real and legitimate concerns from Congress about an agreement over which it has had no substantive input, and which it justifiably fears would be implemented without its consent. Indeed, Congress's voice and vote is vital to the credibility and durability of a final deal. The two branches must work together in advance of a final agreement to set the terms that would be acceptable to the United States, not just to the Administration. They must also define every class of potential Iranian violation and the specific responses to each." http://t.uani.com/1D1A515

Sadegh Zibakalam in Politico: "The nuclear negotiation between Iran and the United States represents a historic shift-one that is actually more significant for Iranians than it is for Americans. If there is a deal over the next week, as the two sides approach their end-of-March deadline, it will severely undermine the ideology that has been in place since the beginning of the Iranian Islamic Republic in 1979, and which regime hardliners have used to great effect to consolidate their power: anti-Americanism as a legitimizing force. For more than 35 years, any liaison whatsoever with the United States has been perceived in Iran as simple treason. Any taint of involvement with the United States by anyone has politically undermined the alleged perpetrator and shored up the regime. Every misfortune and disaster the country confronted was blamed on U.S. intrigues against the Islamic Revolution: Saddam Hussein's invasion of Iran in 1980 and subsequent eight-year war with Iraq; the massacre of more than four hundred Iranian pilgrims in Mecca in 1986; the fall of the oil prices in the late 1980s; the assassinations of hundreds of Iranian revolutionary officials by the People's Mujahidin and everything else that went wrong in post-revolutionary Iran. The Islamic Revolution was turned into a historic struggle against the U.S. aggressor. Now, for the first time since the founding of the Islamic Republic, Tehran and Washington are openly negotiating, and they may be close to an agreement. Were that to be achieved, the Iranian government would have to own up to a new reality that would be a hammer-blow to hardline thinking and could pave the way for the two countries to cooperate on mutual concerns in the region, including in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan and even Lebanon. If the talks fail, on the other hand, it could all easily backfire and play into the hands of the hardliners once again. And we will all be back where we were... It is against this background that the West should view Iran's willingness to negotiate now over the nuclear dispute. Any concession in the country's nuclear activities has been seen, until today, as tantamount to giving in to Western arrogance. Hardliners in Iran would invariably see any suggestion of an easing of hostility between the two countries as a treasonable course, and a path which deviated from Khomeini's path. So this is another revolution for Iran-and if the talks succeed in a deal it could be an enduring revolution. It will undercut the hardliners who have been using anti Americanism as a powerful fuel to justify a wide range of policies both domestically and internationally and exploit Anti-Americanism to justify their mismanagement and wrongdoings. At the same time it will create a more appropriate climate for moderates and reformists inside the country who won't fear engaging in serious conversations with hardliners on both domestic and international concerns, as they will no longer have to labor under the fear of being accused of being pro-American." http://t.uani.com/1Nj1k74

John Bolton in NYT: "The Obama administration's increasingly frantic efforts to reach agreement with Iran have spurred demands for ever-greater concessions from Washington. Successive administrations, Democratic and Republican, worked hard, with varying success, to forestall or terminate efforts to acquire nuclear weapons by states as diverse as South Korea, Taiwan, Argentina, Brazil and South Africa. Even where civilian nuclear reactors were tolerated, access to the rest of the nuclear fuel cycle was typically avoided. Everyone involved understood why. This gold standard is now everywhere in jeopardy because the president's policy is empowering Iran. Whether diplomacy and sanctions would ever have worked against the hard-liners running Iran is unlikely. But abandoning the red line on weapons-grade fuel drawn originally by the Europeans in 2003, and by the United Nations Security Council in several resolutions, has alarmed the Middle East and effectively handed a permit to Iran's nuclear weapons establishment. The inescapable conclusion is that Iran will not negotiate away its nuclear program. Nor will sanctions block its building a broad and deep weapons infrastructure. The inconvenient truth is that only military action like Israel's 1981 attack on Saddam Hussein's Osirak reactor in Iraq or its 2007 destruction of a Syrian reactor, designed and built by North Korea, can accomplish what is required. Time is terribly short, but a strike can still succeed. Rendering inoperable the Natanz and Fordow uranium-enrichment installations and the Arak heavy-water production facility and reactor would be priorities. So, too, would be the little-noticed but critical uranium-conversion facility at Isfahan. An attack need not destroy all of Iran's nuclear infrastructure, but by breaking key links in the nuclear-fuel cycle, it could set back its program by three to five years. The United States could do a thorough job of destruction, but Israel alone can do what's necessary. Such action should be combined with vigorous American support for Iran's opposition, aimed at regime change in Tehran. Mr. Obama's fascination with an Iranian nuclear deal always had an air of unreality. But by ignoring the strategic implications of such diplomacy, these talks have triggered a potential wave of nuclear programs. The president's biggest legacy could be a thoroughly nuclear-weaponized Middle East." http://t.uani.com/1FLmjAn
        

Eye on Iran is a periodic news summary from United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) a program of the American Coalition Against Nuclear Iran, Inc., a tax-exempt organization under Section 501(c)(3) of the Internal Revenue Code. Eye on Iran is not intended as a comprehensive media clips summary but rather a selection of media elements with discreet analysis in a PDA friendly format. For more information please email Press@UnitedAgainstNuclearIran.com

United Against Nuclear Iran (UANI) is a non-partisan, broad-based coalition that is united in a commitment to prevent Iran from fulfilling its ambition to become a regional super-power possessing nuclear weapons.  UANI is an issue-based coalition in which each coalition member will have its own interests as well as the collective goal of advancing an Iran free of nuclear weapons.

No comments:

Post a Comment