News of an imminent deal between the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) and Tehran concerning future inspections of Iranian nuclear facilities was greeted with skepticism in both Tel Aviv and Washington. This evening the Ha’aretz (Hebrew only) website's top headline read, “Western diplomat: The Israeli cynicism is not justified: United States will send a delegation to Israel to coordinate its position concerning Iran.”
According to the newspaper, Vice President Joseph Biden told a gathering of the powerful Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations that the U.S. will soon be sending a group of senior policy and security officials to Israel. The Americans will be coordinating positions for the Iran negotiations with the Israelis.
Ironically quoting Dennis Ross, the world’s foremost expert on U.S.-Israel cooperation, Ha'aretz indicates that Israel will have significant influence on the U.S. positions at the Iran negotiations.
Various officials explained today that the Obama administration is working in coordination with Israel concerning the steps that are being demanded from Iran. President Obama’s former advisor, Dennis Ross, told Ha’aretz that “it is not accidental that Defense Minister Ehud Barak came to Washington last week. I am certain that the aim of his visit was to be part of this dialog. The Israeli position has a certain influence on our position; there is no intention to surprise [the Israelis].”
It seems that if the U.S. was interested in compromising with the Iranians, they would not be so dismissive of the expected agreement with the IAEA. Also, the Obama administration would not be so publicly including the Israelis, who daily insist Iran cannot be trusted to adhere to any agreement and who are seeking unrealistic concessions from Tehran.
Many will claim that this show of unity will scare the Iranians into compliance with Western demands. I do not agree. There was much talk of confidence-building after the first round in Istanbul. Talking tough and bringing in the Israelis is not going to encourage Tehran to trust the U.S. That lack of trust could prove to be the fatal blow to obtaining a diplomatic solution.
I am starting to get the sickening feeling that as was the case with Iraq, the U.S. is not going to Baghdad to make peace, but rather as a prelude to increased sanctions. And if that does not force Iranian capitulation, then it will mean the use of either U.S. or Israeli military force.
Many in the political and military establishments say: Why should we negotiate when we can get what we want by using force? That was Vice President Dick Cheney’s response after hearing of Iran’s very credible offer to start negotiations at the time of the U.S. invasion of Afghanistan. Of course, talking with Tehran was not on the Israeli or pro-Israel lobby’s agenda at the time. It still is not.
It is starting to look a lot like Iraq. The same people are pushing for war. The same undemonstrated charges about weapons of mass destruction are being made.
I hope I am wrong, but I just do not have a good feeling about all this tough talk by the U.S., the five other states in the P5 + 1, and Israel, a day before the next critical round of negotiations begin.
It does nothing to build confidence that the talks will succeed.
“Talking tough and bringing in the Israelis is not going to encourage Tehran to trust the U.S. ”
I bet the Iranians see the Israelis as full of sh*t and incapable of backing up their rhetoric with actions.
Otherwise I imagine they have figured out where to hit Israel where it hurts most, post bombing.
Israel should not attempt this destruction of Iranian society. It is not going to end well.
Andrea Mitchell was pushing the mantra that this latest effort with Iran will not work on MSNBC’s Morning Joe this morning. She has been doing this on MSNBC for years now. Repeating the unsubstantiated claims about Iran and then pushing for sanctions for years. This morning on the program Former ambassador Richardson shared his opinion about these latest negotiations and said that he did not think these lastest efforts would work. Then Andrea took the opportunity to fuel that view by asking Bill Richardson “what would you do bomb them?” Talk about putting words in someones mouth. Richardson said ” no but keep up the sanctions”
Never ever in our MSM do you hear Andrea Mitchell, Diane Rehm, Rachel Maddow, Chris Matthews etc etc anyone state the facts. As a signatory to the IAEA’s Non Proliferation Treaty Iran has the legal right to enrich uranium. They have the legal right to enrich up to 20%.. To ask them to enrich to a lower level is one thing. Israel and the I lobby want them to stop enriching all together and also undermined an offer by Brazil and some other nation to enrich to the level that Iran needs for peaceful purposes. All of this coming out of Israel a nation who has and continues to refuse to sign the NPT and sit on massive stockpiles of un inspected nuclear ,biological and chemical weapons. And Israel’s Reps in the U.S. congress push this hypocritical stance in Aipac/ Jinsa legislation. So terribly absurd/
You have a right to be skeptical, Turkey and Brazil concluded a deal with Iran back in 2010, both countries knew the US position intimately, unfortunately the US position at the time was that they expected and were confident the talks would fail and were shocked when a deal was concluded, Hillary Clinton attacked Turkey and Brazil for reaching the very deal Obama wanted a few weeks previous . The Iranians should take note, the US/Israel will not take yes for an answer, remember Iran has been under increasing sanction well before any nuclear issue arose. Regime change by any means is and always has been the name of the game, in my opinion nothing the Iranians do will change US/Israel policy, thank goodness the Iranians have the ability to close the Strait of Hormuz, the major obstacle stopping the lunatics from using force.
“thank goodness the Iranians have the ability to close the Strait of Hormuz”
Closure of the Strait would be a disaster for Iran – the US would either treat it as an act of war and bomb Iran or, alternatively, there would be a naval confrontation in the Persian Gulf from which the Iranians would not be able to back down, and the loss of life from the sinking of a USN ship (or ships!!) would result in Iran being massively bombed.
The Iranians know that closing the Strait is not an option no matter what they threaten.
>> IG: It is starting to look a lot like Iraq. … The same undemonstrated charges about weapons of mass destruction are being made.
>> HL: Regime change by any means is and always has been the name of the game, in my opinion nothing the Iranians do will change US/Israel policy …
Iraq redux:
>> Press Briefing by Ari Fleischer, December 2, 2002
>> A.F.: … Saddam Hussein does not exactly have a track record of telling the world the truth. So he, on December 8th, has to indicate whether or not he has weapons. Let’s see what he says. If he declares he has none, then we will know that Saddam Hussein is once again misleading the world.
That one still blows me away.
link to youtube.com
>> link to youtube.com
This says to me: “Thomas Friedman is an idiot.”
thanks for your report Ira. i’ve been on p5+1 watch all morning, probably read about 15 articles, there’s just not a lot there.
frankly, it’s boring. the most interesting aspect is the IAEA met w/iran and others in amman on tuesday to iron out some stuff and according to IAEA Director General Yukiya Amano :
so, they entered the talk w/that under their belt.
link to sfgate.com
the talks are resuming tomorrow, they are not over yet. israel/DC announced last weekend, as i recall, they would not be lessoning sanctions at this round of talks in baghdad…then there’s this:
and from china we get:
but things are not spinning out of control. nothings been signed yet but amano said all system go on signing. according to him. “According to the IAEA general director, there are some details still to be negotiated, but he told reporters that will not hinder the signing of the resolution.” link to plenglish.com
Haaretz is reporting a different take, that Israel “might” be willing to accept more than it lets on.
link to haaretz.com
The language in this article is so embarassing for an American. The Israeli papers make it clear they views Israel’s acceptance as a sine qua non for discussions to even take place, much less for a deal to be arranged. What does it matter what Israel “concedes” or allows? Israel is not among the negotiating parties. It has nothing to offer to anyone. It’s only leverage is the appearance that it will not allow the US to make any sort of deal. This is just humiliating.
In passing, the Haaretz article is also soft-pedalling the latest lie:
Expect to see this lie floated elsewhere and become the new line of the day. Now that Iran and the IAEA may have agree to inspections of Parchin, the warmongers need to quickly declare sour grapes there and move on to a new lie.
It seems that the goal of USA is to maintain as much acute sections as long as possible, REGARDLESS of the nuclear issues. So the question is what is possible.
I think that China has the pivotal role. China has its own complex deals and tradeoffs with USA, but it also does not want USA to play hegemon in Asia. Most crucially, China can disable the sanctions, perhaps not totally but most of the recent “ratcheting up”. They can buy all Iranian oil if they want (or enough to embolden smaller Asian and African countries, and that includes India, to increase purchases of Iranian oil, presumably offered at some discount), USA cannot sanction main Chinese banks as China has a big role in controlling interest rates in USA etc.
Russia and to a degree India have the same situation. USA is a very valuable partner but not welcome as a hegemon.
The major events this year are EU sanctions, which is a huge success for “as much sanctions as possible”, and actual talks. The second interesting event was that just before the previous round USA floated the idea of “preconditions”, including dismantling Fordow facility that probably cannot be disabled by a conventional bombardment, and least of all, by Israeli bombers. Somehow, this was promptly forgotten, so someone had to communicate a veto, and I suspect that China and Russia could do it, with EU governments joining.
Neocon fantasists live in a world where USA decides what is good and what is bad and the game is won or lost by lobbying in Washington. But we are not there anymore.
Let’s see how prescient or clueless I was.
sabotaged well before the next five weeks elapse.
they are doing their darndest right up to the last minute.
On air as I tap the keys:
link to bbc.co.uk
“Decision Time” discussing how to avoid war with Iran, participants being formerly advisors/Ambassadors/Envoys in UK and US govts (inc current admins).
Should be available as podcast shortly after broadcast.
RE: “Vice President Joseph Biden told a gathering of the powerful Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations that the U.S. will soon be sending a group of senior policy and security officials to Israel. The Americans will be coordinating positions for the Iran negotiations with the Israelis.” ~ Ira Glunts
MY COMMENT: I’m shocked. I’m truly shocked. NOT!
FROM THE TRANSCRIPT OF A TELEPHONE CALL IN 1992 INVOLVING DAVID STEINER, AIPAC’S PRESIDENT AT THE TIME (POSTED ON M.J. ROSENBERG’S BLOG):
SOURCE – link to mjayrosenberg.com
Chet, the Iranians are only threatening to close the strait in the event of their being bombed by US/Israel, a last ditch scenario no doubt, but it is their only creditable option, call it mutually assured destruction, it is certainly the one option keeping the US/Israel at bay.
Above post should read credible not creditable. sorry.
It looks like a lot of non-committal language from the White House to keep the donors on an even keel, attempts at lobbying the White House by Barak and spin by former administration officials to keep up the appearance that they still have access and are still as important as they used to be.
The Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations (MAJO?) was formed during the Eisenhower administration to lobby the Executive branch. They always have had regular access to the President. What might be more notable is that they only got a speech from the VP instead.
Obama’s last chance? If the peace prize winner scuttles these negotiations, in deference to King Bibi’s edicts, Iran may well become convinced, as Saddam was rightfully convinced, that sanctions and negotiations are just camouflage for an Israeli/American war on Iran. If the US says no to Iran this time, Iran’s leadership would be compelled to put their war plans into high gear. This could be Obama’s last chance to prove to the Iranians and the world that he doesn’t want war. More sanctions won’t convince Iran that a negotiated settlement is still possible with a President who functions as Israel’s mouthpiece.