Iran blames changing demands for tough talks/Dr. Majid Rafizadeh: Playing with diplomacy: Obama’s fear of nuclear failure//As Iran talks continue in Vienna, Israel, US flags, burn in streets of Tehran
Iran blames changing demands for tough talks
AP, Vienna/Friday, 10 July 2015
The Iran nuclear talks turned Friday from talk of progress to a blame game, with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif accusing the United States of shifting its demands. He dismissed a warning that the U.S. is ready to quit the negotiations as counterproductive.
Hours after his comments, Zarif met again U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry for another try at resolving differences standing in the way of a landmark deal that offers Iran sanctions relief in exchange for long-term and verifiable curbs on nuclear programs which Tehran could turn to making weapons. The tougher rhetoric mirrored the frustrations by the sides as the current round of talks entered its 14th day. After blowing past two extensions, negotiators had hoped to wrap up the talks by Friday, but Zarif’s comments cast doubts that agreement was near. The sides had hoped to seal a deal before the end of Thursday in Washington in attempts to avoid delays in implementing their promises. By missing that target, the U.S. and Iran now have to wait for a 60-day congressional review period during which President Barack Obama cannot waive sanctions on Iran. Had they reached a deal by then, the review would have been only 30 days. Iran is unlikely to begin a substantial rollback of its nuclear program until it gets sanctions relief in return.
The talks are formally between Iran and six world powers but have devolved into U.S.-Iranian negotiations over recent months, with diplomats saying the other nations were ready to accept terms agreed to by Tehran and Washington. Zarif’s critical comments were thus seen as mostly directed against Washington. Still, disagreements also have surfaced recently between the U.S. and Russia. Moscow supports Iranian demands for at least a partial lifting of the conventional arms embargo as part of any deal. That’s something Washington opposes – and an issue Zarif appeared to touch on in his comments to Iranian state television. Beyond “witnessing a change of stances” from the other side, Zarif noted a “different stand” on some issues among the six nations. “This situation has made the work difficult,” he said. Kerry had warned on Thursday that the Americans were ready to leave, declaring “we can’t wait forever for a decision to be made.” Zarif, in contrast, said his side was ready to stay and work for a “dignified and balanced deal.”Even jokes meant to dispel tensions reflected the raw nerves after two weeks straight at the negotiating table, relieved only by brief breathers on the balcony of the ornate manor-turned-hotel venue for the talks. “We’re pushing,” said Kerry when asked if there would be a deal this weekend.
“Off the balcony,” quipped Federica Mogherini, the top EU diplomat convening the talks, prompting a smile and a wave of the finger from Kerry. The scope of access to U.N. inspectors monitoring Iran’s nuclear program remains one of the sticking points. The Americans want no restrictions, whereas Iranian officials say they are concerned that unrestricted monitoring could be a cover for Western spying. Diplomats say Iran’s negotiators have signaled a willingness to compromise on the issue, but hardliners in Iran remain opposed to broad U.N. inspections. In a message directed to “negotiators on both sides,” Iran’s military spokesman, Gen. Masoud Jazayeri, told Iran’s Fars news agency that “access to the military sites will not be allowed under any circumstance.” Anti-American sentiment remains strong in the country, though Iranians overwhelmingly welcomed the preliminary accord in April. On Friday, tens of thousands of Iranians taking part in an annual pro-Palestinian rally marched in Tehran, chanting “Down with America” and “Death to Israel.” An Iranian clergyman chants slogan in an annual pro-Palestinian rally marking Al-Quds (Jerusalem) Day at the Enqelab-e-Eslami (Islamic Revolution) St. in Tehran, Iran, Friday, July 10, 2015 (AP)
As Iran talks continue in Vienna, Israel, US flags, burn in streets of Tehran By JPOST.COM STAFF/07/10/2015/
As world powers in Vienna continued talks with Iran over its nuclear program for the fifteenth straight day, demonstrators took to the streets in the Islamic Republic Friday in anti-Israel protests. Millions of Iranians took part in the protests in “cities across the country” to mark International Quds (Jerusalem) Day, Iran’s Fars news agency reported. Iranian protesters burned Israeli, American, Saudi Arabian, and British flags in Tehran to mark the day. Protesters carried placards and chanted “Down with the US” and “Down with Israel,” Fars reported. Quds day – initiated in 1979 by the Islamic Republic’s founder Ayatollah Khomeini – is an annual event of fiery anti-Israel protests in Iran held on the last Friday of Ramadan. Ayatollah Mohammad Taqi Vaezi, one of some 80 members of Iran’s Assembly of Experts that is a supervisory body around Iran’s Supreme Leader, was quoted Wednesday as saying that shouting the “Death to the Zionist regime” chant prevents Israeli “aggression.” Earlier in the week, Iran’s Foreign Ministry, according to the The Islamic Republic News Agency, issued a statement to mark the coming day, saying that the “restoration of lasting peace and tranquility in the Middle East can be attained through full observance of legitimate rights of oppressed Palestinian nation.”
Nuclear talks/ Iran’s foreign minister said on Friday that talks between Iran and the six major powers had made some progress but were likely to continue during the weekend. “Some progress has been made but we are not there yet … I doubt it will happen today … it seems that we are going to spend the weekend in Vienna,” Mohammad Javad Zarif told reporters. Despite the ups and downs and missed deadlines in the nuclear talks , Jerusalem believes the the world powers will soon sign an agreement with Iran, paving its way to a bomb, senior officials in the Prime Minister’s Office said on Thursday. US Secretary of State John Kerry said Thursday that the US is“absolutely prepared to call an end” to negotiations with Iran if Tehran does not make a series of “tough” political choices, quickly. But the US is not walking out yet, after blowing through its third deadline for those talks in just two weeks. Kerry said that neither he, nor President Barack Obama, nor their allies in the P5+1 powers (Britain, France, Russia, China and Germany) are willing to rush to complete a nuclear deal that would face a “test for decades.” **Herb Keinon, Michael Wilner and Reuters contributed to this report.
Playing with diplomacy: Obama’s fear of nuclear failure
Dr. Majid Rafizadeh/Al Arabiya/ Friday, 10 July 2015
One of the lengthiest diplomatic negotiations, the Iranian nuclear deal seems to be never-ending. Two deadlines have already been missed in the last month. In addition, the negotiators missed the target of tonight Washington time set by the U.S. Congress. This would grant the Congress two months instead of 30 days to review any agreement. Nevertheless, it is crucial to point out that extensions or missing deadlines do not necessarily scuttle the nuclear talks or mean that the negotiations will fall apart. With Russia and China being on the side of Tehran, the Islamic Republic’s attempts to obtain more concessions from the United States, France, and Germany are on the rise. After almost two years of negotiations and meetings, the motive to reach a final nuclear deal has also intensified for Obama administration. While at the beginning of the talks, President Obama might have been searching for a lifetime legacy in the Middle East by sealing a nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic, currently another reason is pushing the talks- the president’s fear of his credibility being damaged if a deal is not reached.
It is evident that the current terms being negotiated will not only keep Iran’s nuclear threat intact, but will create a whole new security framework. Not reaching a nuclear deal with the Islamic Republic would be a strong blow to President Obama and the Democratic Party due to the considerable amount of political capital that has been spent on these marathon talks. As a result, diplomacy is being played in order to keep dragging the nuclear talks into a seemingly never-ending process. In addition, Iran is good at this and at obtaining more points to its advantage. The Iranian leaders want the deal both ways. Iran demands more: Political opportunism and the lifting of the arms embargo. In the eleventh hour, Iran has added another demand to the table: lifting the arms embargo on Iran as part of the U.N. sanctions against the Islamic Republic.
If the arms embargo is lifted, it will have severe repercussions on ratcheting up the conflict in Iraq and Syria, as Iran will gain access to more advanced weapons. Iran’s demand in the final hours indicates that Iranian leaders are very skillful at diplomacy and realize President Obama’s weakness and desperation to seal a deal. In addition, the Iranian negotiating team is capitalizing on the split in their opponent’s teams as Russia and China are on the Iranian side when it comes to lifting the arms embargo. Iranian leaders will attempt to obtain the optimum amount of concessions without rushing to seal a deal. With the lifting of the arms embargo, the deal will be much sweeter for the Iranians. Iranian leaders will have it both ways. After 10 years , if Iran do not cheat and if the ruling clerics honor their commitments (which the Islamic Republic does not have a good record of doing), Iran’s nuclear break-out capacity will shrink to zero, meaning Iran will be a nuclear power. Secondly, Iran will gain more advanced weaponry, the IRGC will solidify its economic power, and the government will receive billions of dollars.
Another issue is that, even if the six world powers and the Islamic Republic reach a “final” nuclear deal, the deal is not going to be final. Both sides will not be signing the final agreement until a few months later. First, the U.S. Congress and Iranian domestic counterparts will review the agreement. Then, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) will have to inspect Iran’s nuclear activities and verify the compliance with the article of the agreement. Finally, after the IAEA verified compliance, sanctions will be lifted and both sides will sign the deal. This method also appears to be a solution not to discredit Iran’s Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei’s redline. Khamenei previously demanded that all sanctions should be lifted upon the signing of the final agreement. While in international diplomacy, deals are first signed and then implemented, the six world powers and the Islamic Republic are reversing the process. Will it be a good deal? Who will be the winner? Another crucial and lingering question is whether the potential deal will be a good one, and who the primary winner or losers will be. The response to such questions depends on the terms of the deal and the lenses through which one analyzes and examines the nuclear deal.
It is crucial to point out that the winners and losers of such a deal will not be limited to the seven countries engaged in the talks. The repercussions or positive aspects of such a deal goes beyond the gilded circle. One can argue that the winners will be primarily President Obama, the Iranian government, Shiite proxies in the region, Iran’s Revolutionary Guard Corps, President Rowhani, the Syrian government, Bashar Al-Assad, as well as Western corporations and companies. President Obama will finally have a quiet night as he will seal and achieve his awaited dream and foreign policy legacy. President Obama and his administration will also be creating the narrative that the deal is historic and a positive one for the world.
On the other hand, the easing of sanctions on Iran will create a whole array of other winners including the IRGC, office of the supreme leader, and the Quds force (an elite branch of IRGC which operates in extraterritorial landscapes). As the economic power of the IRGC and the Quds force increases, Iran’s Shiite proxies in the region will benefit from the trickling down of these funds. Assad can be more assured that the Islamic Republic will continue supporting his government financially, economically, militarily, and through intelligence and advisory roles.
Finally, non-state or state actors which will not benefit from the potential deal are those that are resisting the Shiite militias or are concerned with regards to the Iran’s hegemonic ambitions, it’s search for regional preeminence and supremacy and are worried about Iran’s attempts to tip the balance of power in its favor. The question of whether the deal will be a good or bad one depends on how and who looks at the deal. When we analyze the negotiations and terms comprehensively and meticulously, it becomes evident that the current terms being negotiated will not only keep Iran’s nuclear threat intact, but it will create a whole new security framework, geopolitical concerns and nuclear arms race in the region.
