Iran Nuclear Talks Could Fail in Final Week
EmailLara Setrakian & Kirit Radia report:
In Tehran and Washington, expectations are dim for a deal on the IAEA nuclear proposal that would have Iran export its low-enriched uranium for processing, easing global fears over its nuclear program. US officials have suggested there is just one week left for Iran to respond before a hard push for new international sanctions; in the past few weeks both the US House and Senate have passed legislation toward unilateral sanctions that would punish foreign companies that sell refined gasoline to Iran.
Ever since the nuclear fuel swap proposal was hammered out in Vienna, Iran has sent mixed messages, at best. On Saturday, a conservative Iranian MP ruled out sending uranium abroad, then on Sunday another prominent MP said the deal was still on the table. The equivocating is a sign of no clear decision from Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei; any indication that he wants a deal would shut down the internal bickering. To the contrary, Khamenei’s remarks last Tuesday, bashing the Obama administration, seemed to augur poorly for better ties with Washington.
Western officials and analysts interpret the noise from Iran as a sign that the regime either doesn’t know what it wants, or that wants to keep its uranium stockpile and relations with America as is. IAEA Director General Mohamed El Baradei is working to salvage the proposed deal, suggesting that the uranium be shipped to Turkey while Iran waits for fuel delivery from Russia – held in a kind of nuclear escrow. Iran doesn’t seem to have warmed to the idea, having already requested its own amendments to the original proposal (which the US has ruled out).
The bottom line from US and European diplomats, which comes to a head this week: no nuclear deal means no second round of Geneva talks. And there is nothing beyond the Geneva talks. That would take the response to Iran’s nuclear program out of the diplomacy phase and into punitive mode, starting with sanctions that even a frustrated Russia has suggested it would support. In that case, the P5+1 would likely meet to discuss new sanctions. Those discussions have been ongoing, so they do already have a sense of the measures they’d like to pursue. The road bump this time is expected to be China; President Obama is going to make an appeal for Chinese support for sanctions (that high a level!) when he’s there at the end of this week.
It’s worth recalling that the three major “wins” of the first Geneva talks, as cited by officials, were:
1) The prospect of more talks (by the end of October)
2) The prospect of a fuel swap deal
3) The promise of IAEA inspections at the Fardo nuclear facility near Qom
So far only #3 has come to pass – even there critics argue that Iran had little choice but to let the inspectors in, and plenty of time to move or hide any evidence. By Geneva’s standards for success, we may be approaching the time when President Obama’s strategy of engagement with Iran is declared moot, if not failed.
- Kirit Radia & Lara Setrakian
Sen. DeMint: GOP Race Could Go Until Convention 
Obama Avoids Questions on Contraception Rule
“US officials have suggested there is just one week left for Iran to respond before a hard push for new international sanctions…President Obama is going to make an appeal for Chinese support for sanctions …”
This is such weak and nonbinding language.
I’m starting to think this administration doesn’t really grap the enormity or the intricacies of being a world leader.
Obama appears to both embrace elitism and yet wish for American exceptionalism to be done away with and quickly. I guess the last one in wants to close the door on others.
I’m still waiting for the “grown ups”, that the Democrats promised would be in charge, to show up.
Posted by: WhereWasThePress? | November 9, 2009, 8:49 am 8:49 am
“global fears over its nuclear program”
Where is the evidence for this statement? There are no “global fears” over Irans nuclear program, it is a fetish of the western elites and their press.
Posted by: Flash Override | November 9, 2009, 9:14 am 9:14 am
Iran must do exactly as we say. They will not be allowed to use nukes on civilians as we have. They will not be allowed to attacked anyone as we do every other year or so. They will not be able to overthrow our democratically elected leader and install an opulent dictator as we did for them in 1953. Nice.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 9:32 am 9:32 am
So I supposed your opinion is to just simply start bombing and have a third war to make you happy. That is an adult to you, one who just starts wars to get what he wants. Hmmm….I think maybe I would like a different adult that you do. One that discusses, negotiates, threatens and then if all else fails, goes to war as a last resort.
Posted by: Henry | November 9, 2009, 9:44 am 9:44 am
The WH has been played by the Iranians and have bought another 9 months to enrich uranium and perfect their bomb.
Obama declared to AIPAC during the campaign-” I will not allow Iran to have a nuclear weapon”.
Joe Wilson is right.
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 9:56 am 9:56 am
NYT:
WASHINGTON — The Obama administration, attempting to salvage a faltering nuclear deal with Iran, has told Iran’s leaders in back-channel messages that it is willing to allow the country to send its stockpile of enriched uranium to any of several nations, including Turkey, for temporary safekeeping, according to administration officials and diplomats involved in the exchanges.
To think our security is in the hands of these chumps and losers.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | November 9, 2009, 9:58 am 9:58 am
Huh,
Why don’t you just pack up and move to sunny Iran and break free of the ‘big,bad’ USA.
We used nuclear weapons on Japan to END a war THEY started.
Did those weapons kill any more people than the bombs we dropped on Germany?
Please, remind us all we helped subvert Iran’s govt. nearly 60 YRS AGO.
Get over it.
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 10:03 am 10:03 am
China will jump in after Obama goes and pleads his case (maybe with a litte US bashing to add flavor or maybe its time to blame somebody else like he has to mop up the mess from the Crusades) and Iran will get more delays and still no results.
The Iranians don’t know who they are dealing with – they are in for a really, really stern speech this time – that will straighten them out.
Posted by: TucsonWilly | November 9, 2009, 10:25 am 10:25 am
“in the past few weeks both the US House and Senate have passed legislation toward unilateral sanctions that would punish foreign companies that sell refined gasoline to Iran.”
Oh they’ll be just fine. If they just inflate their tires and get regular tune-ups, they can save just as much!
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 10:39 am 10:39 am
===In Tehran and Washington, expectations are dim for a deal on the IAEA nuclear proposal that would have Iran export its low-enriched uranium for processing, easing global fears over its nuclear program. ===
Oh no. I just knew hope and change were going to do the trick.
Posted by: Axey | November 9, 2009, 10:47 am 10:47 am
Dim? They’ve been dim for 8 yrs.
Maybe the right word isn’t dim but dumb.
Another word might be DHIMMWIT …..
Posted by: Terry | November 9, 2009, 11:03 am 11:03 am
I thought there was going to be “negotiation.” It is not negotiation when the US and the Western powers propose an unreasonable deal and say “take it or leave it.” Iran will never agree to send all its LEU to another country when there is no guarantee that it will get anything back in return. Obama and Hillary Clinton are too simple-minded to understand the basics of diplomatic negotiation.
Posted by: George | November 9, 2009, 11:20 am 11:20 am
J House – You can do your own research. My hands are tired so you are on your own on learning history. I will not pack up and go. My relatives go back to Jamestown so I am as American as anybody. I choose to rail against our foreign policy because I see it mired in hypocrisy and injustice. The bomb was used on Japan, and I don’t have a problem with that per say, but what if Iran needs to use one against someone attacking them.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 11:43 am 11:43 am
Iran’s supreme leader, spurning what he described as several personal overtures from President Obama, warned Tuesday (Nov 3) that negotiating with the United States would be “naive and perverted” and that Iranian politicians should not be “deceived” into starting such talks.
Posted by: Foghorn Leghorn | November 9, 2009, 11:51 am 11:51 am
This is a very perilous time to be doing amateur hour at the White House and State Department. Perilous indeed.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | November 9, 2009, 12:08 pm 12:08 pm
Remain calm ladies. Diplomatic processes can be long and tortuous. Ignoring Iran wasn’t getting us anywhere and threatening them will only convince them they need a nuclear weapon for sure.
Posted by: Skip | November 9, 2009, 12:37 pm 12:37 pm
The TERRORIST attack at Ft Hood-more than any single day loss of life due to enemy fire in both Irag and Afghanistan over the last 8 yrs. It as planned, executed and ended in the battlecry-’Allah Akhbar’, yet we’re told by our President and media that this was another ‘deranged’ mass killing.
What are the mathematical odds that a practicing Muslim in our ranks (the total of which is far less than 1 tenth of one percent), also in contact with jihadist message boards, ends up by coincidence(!) being the US armed force’s biggest mass murderer in history?
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 12:47 pm 12:47 pm
Skip – You are correct.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 12:51 pm 12:51 pm
Skip,
Trust me, the Iranians are going to do what they want to do regardless US actions…and what they want to do for the past 20 yrs is join the nuclear club.
They have every ‘right’ to do it, as Israel has the ‘right’, as we do.
But trust me, the result is going to be ugly, and no charm or diplomacy by this President is going to matter a bit.
The President lied to AIPAC when he said in his speech ” we will not let Iran have a nuclear weapon”.
He will.
The Iranians already have a bomb design and enough Uranium to further enrich to construct a device. It is not now a matter of one, but how many and how they can be delivered to Iran’s enemies (you know, the one’s like us, where they chanted ‘death to America’ in the streets last week)
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 12:53 pm 12:53 pm
J House – To me his allegiance to his fellow Muslims on the receiving end of our bombs outweighed his allegiance to America the country of his birth. It really is as simple as that. He most likely viewed our foreign interventions as terrorist acts themselves and could not take the fact that he was about to become part of that injustice. After all it was preemptive and many civilians have been killed. I am not condoning his actions but rather viewing them from his mind if that is possible. Time to stop our threats and ill-advised foreign interventions because it is creating more enemies than we can imagine, as it should. It is a good thing we have two oceans surrounding us but even that may not stop them in the future. By the way if a country did to us what we have been doing to many in the Middle East and beyond, I would certainly take up my 2nd amendment rights and take on the perpetrators.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 12:55 pm 12:55 pm
J House – Yep they were yelling those silly slogans again. I know the Mossedeq (sp?) thing happend over 60 years ago, but many younger adults may still hold a grudge for our support of Iraq and Iran against each other in the 80′s just to bleed each other, you know kill a few Muslim folks. The may not like how many in power in the US talk about our oil that just so happens to be under their sand. very unfortunate indeed. They may not like the continued threats from us and Israel against their ways and sovereignty. I want Iran to be more democratic. Lets hope we don’t overthrow that turn of events like we did 60 years ago. We need to be more sensible in our dealings with Iran. Our hardline approach has only driven that population towards the hardliners. Between our CIA’s actions and those at the state department, this situation is the mess that it is.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 1:02 pm 1:02 pm
Remain calm ladies. Diplomatic processes can be long and tortuous. Ignoring Iran wasn’t getting us anywhere and threatening them will only convince them they need a nuclear weapon for sure.
Posted by: Skip | Nov 9, 2009 12:37:57 PM
Don’t ignore them. Don’t threaten them. “Diplomatic processes” is kinda vague…
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:03 pm 1:03 pm
Believe me Skip, if you has any idea the ‘low level’ war we’ve been in with Iran for the past 30 yrs, you would not have written we have ‘ignored Iran’.
During Bush 1, Clinton and Bush 2, we have taken military and covert intel action against Iran, both to subvert acts of state-sponsored terrorism and to disrupt their nuclear weapons/missile programs. They have hardly been ignored.We have also opened diplomatic back-channels, only to be rebuffed.
They have also ‘talked to us’- like attacking the Air Force barracks at Khobar towers and destroying a synagogue in Buenos Aires, or smuggling EFP’s and terrorist teams into Iraq to kill our soldiers
We’re at war with Iran…but our President pretends they are just like us and want peace, while they continue to develop the most destructive weapons on earth.
He is very naiive at best-dangerous to our national security at worst.
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
Skip – You are correct.
Posted by: Huh | Nov 9, 2009 12:51:04 PM
Seeing your other comments, I surmise you two have no problem with Iran developing nuclear capability. That your plan all along? That way Israel can do the dirty work and you can rail against them too? How noble.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:05 pm 1:05 pm
Fascist Hyena. You’re not kidding, amateur hour at the White House but Leftoids live in a dream world & can’t figure out consequences, wishful thinking, empty slogans, & pretty rhetoric clouds their minds.
Unfortunately, we all suffer the consequences.
Posted by: Terry | November 9, 2009, 1:12 pm 1:12 pm
Skip,
I’d ask you, where did our ‘hardliners approach’ get us with the Soviet Union?
What did that ‘hardliner’ Reagan say to the leaders of the Soviet Union at the Berlin Wall?
He challenged them and we stood up to Communism…not rolled over.
I recall the ‘nuclear freeze’ movement of the ’80′s…an effort to prevent the West from confronting the Soviet’s missile deployment in E. Europe (our President was part of it).
It was naiive then and naiive now.
Confronting our adversaries is sometimes necessary, and proven.
Where is Saddam today, by the way?
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 1:15 pm 1:15 pm
ike Iraq they failed a month ago. All thats happening now is Iran is finishing up its program and the white house knows it. Time helps the enemy
Posted by: Jim Rod | November 9, 2009, 1:17 pm 1:17 pm
“What did that ‘hardliner’ Reagan say to the leaders of the Soviet Union at the Berlin Wall?”
I would support a Reagan strategy for Iran completely. Reagan never threatened to attack the Soviet Union no matter how many weapons they had. We should contain Iran, keep up economic pressure and shower them with blue jeans, home entertainment centers, Ipods and Blackberries. It’ll only be a matter of time.
Posted by: Skip | November 9, 2009, 1:30 pm 1:30 pm
Visualize Whirled Peas – Israel already does the dirty work. Locking the Palestinians between checkpoints separated from the land that they have worked for generations seems pretty dirty to me. Expanding settlements seems pretty dirty. Diverting water away from the Arab areas to the settlements with their green lawns and swimming pools seems a might dirty. Search and seizures, cutting off power, food, etc. seems really dirty. Yep, you are right Israel will do the dirty work indeed. I have no problem with Israel existing, but they are only hurting themselves with their present actions.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 1:32 pm 1:32 pm
Posted by: J House | Nov 9, 2009 1:15:46 PM
Read Natan Sharansky’s book and he’ll tell you Kissinger’s “detente” made it worse for dissidents in the Soviet Union. It was the work of a Congressman (forget his name now) and others that helped the most.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:34 pm 1:34 pm
“I surmise you two have no problem with Iran developing nuclear capability.”
by: Visualize Whirled Peas
I most certainly do. But I have an even bigger problem with getting into any more wars or widening the conflict in the Middle East. Should I surmise from your cynical title that you have no problem with that?
Posted by: Skip | November 9, 2009, 1:36 pm 1:36 pm
It’ll only be a matter of time.
Posted by: Skip | Nov 9, 2009 1:30:10 PM
Great plan if they weren’t developing nuclear technology. It’s too easy for them right now to clamp down when necessary as was just proven. Time we don’t have, my friend. Otherwise I would agree with your plan as far as it goes.
But cheer up and read Vince Flynn’s Protect & Defend (I believe it’s that one). There may be an IDF “plant” walking the halls of Iran’s facility as we speak.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:40 pm 1:40 pm
Skip,
If you advocate that policy, then you have cast our ‘partnership’ with Israel to the wind.Whether you or I like it or not, the U.S. will help defend Israel.
Our energy lifeline is tied to the M.E.
Whether we like it or not, we are are a party to conflict in that area of the world.We currently have a few hundred thousand military forces in the region, as well as a significant air and naval contingent.
We’re there to stay for decades, until we’re all running windmills and solar panels, or, finding the will to drill for energy at home.
Posted by: J House | November 9, 2009, 1:45 pm 1:45 pm
But I have an even bigger problem with getting into any more wars or widening the conflict in the Middle East. Should I surmise from your cynical title that you have no problem with that?
Posted by: Skip | Nov 9, 2009 1:36:26 PM
Now that’s a tough one because I have a big problem with whole peoples being obviously tortured and killed and then not defending the defenseless because of the sovereignty issue. As a “whirled citizen” I abhor the defense sovereignty provides. As an American citizen I understand it. The United Nations as I understand it was supposed to help resolve that issue after WWII but it has simply not done the job. I prefer the pursuit of some type of world effort that would actually have some teeth in its resolutions. But to be honest, I am unsure how to go about acomplishing that.
The cynical title? I saw it on a bumper sticker years ago and it made me chuckle. I thought it was clever.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:48 pm 1:48 pm
I most certainly do.
Posted by: Skip | Nov 9, 2009 1:36:26 PM
I’m glad to hear that. Not sure about Huh, though.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:50 pm 1:50 pm
“I would support a Reagan strategy for Iran completely”
What? Sell them more weapons?
Posted by: Flash Override | November 9, 2009, 1:53 pm 1:53 pm
Visualize Whirled Peas -Good luck with your quest of changing the world. Unfortunately our finances require that we drastically scale back our empire, especially when dollar hegemony starts to unravel.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 1:55 pm 1:55 pm
Posted by: Huh | Nov 9, 2009 1:32:34 PM
If it’s all the same to you, I prefer to stay on the Iran topic here and what to do about it.
BTW, are you in favor of Iran having nuclear capability? Yes? No? Still deciding? Don’t care?
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 1:56 pm 1:56 pm
“The cynical title? I saw it on a bumper sticker years ago and it made me chuckle. I thought it was clever.”
It is. I may be oversensitive but there are many of us the world over who believe that world peace would be the greatest achievement of mankind and is worth striving for no matter how difficult it might seem. I thought you might be trying to rain on our parade.
Posted by: Skip | November 9, 2009, 2:01 pm 2:01 pm
Visualize Whirled Peas – My own thoughts on this is monitor but don’t provocate them towards feeling the need to develop certain capabilities. Of course, we are past that juncture with our threats and policies towards them over the last 60 years. Our path forward should be much more pragmatic and diplomatic. The best thing that can happen is for the people of Iran to rise up against the oppressive regime and demand democratic change in mass. This will not happen as long as we keep threatening them, as this only drives them towards the hardliners. Maybe thats our plan! Keeps the military industrial complex busy. Our policies such as sanctions have been very harsh on Iran. Less we forget that the sanctions in the 90′s according to 60 minutes and confirmed by Madeleine Albright took out 1 million Iraqis. Terrorism at its most insidious. If Iran develops weapons and they use them, they will wiped off the face of the earth in minutes. They realize this, but they also realize that the threat of deterrence may change the way certain powers treat them. After all China is a police state that treats humans as expendable, but we are not going to ride in and make them democratic. Why? Because they are too powerful and besides trading with them has opened the door to reform. This needs to be the path forward with Iran. Not bullying and threats. There is my 2 cents, maybe 5 cents. Oh ya and Ron Paul is the man.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm
Visualize Whirled Peas – Gotta go to lunch. Take care bud.
Posted by: Huh | November 9, 2009, 2:08 pm 2:08 pm
Good luck with your quest of changing the world. Unfortunately our finances require that we drastically scale back our empire, especially when dollar hegemony starts to unravel
Posted by: Huh | Nov 9, 2009 1:55:15 PM
If it’s the shared interests of everyone, I’m not sure how finances figures into it unless you’re assuming I meant the U.S. going it alone. My desire would be to see the nations work together to get rid of obvious instances of innocents being tortured, starved, raped, etc. whuich all seem to result from “fear” societies.
The U.N. seems incapabale of enforcing its own resolutions. As I said, I would not know how to start a different plan in today’s world but I would like to see it. I’m afraid however, it’s going to take a much more horrific event than what we see every day to wake people up and get them to want “whirled peas.” (Reminds me of how we don’t think a lot about traffic fatalaties unless they all occurred at the same time in the same place. Then we would be horrified and probably would work harder to erradicate it.)
I’m not talking Utopia but it would be nice to all work towards justice. I hate to think that “minding our own business” is the only way to go.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 2:09 pm 2:09 pm
“The cynical title? I saw it on a bumper sticker years ago and it made me chuckle. I thought it was clever.”
It is. I may be oversensitive but there are many of us the world over who believe that world peace would be the greatest achievement of mankind and is worth striving for no matter how difficult it might seem. I thought you might be trying to rain on our parade.
Posted by: Skip | Nov 9, 2009 2:01:30 PM
Considering my usual comments, I can understand your suspicions. ;-) I’m working on that…
It is worth striving for no matter how difficult. It can only help. I’m one of those “men are inherently evil” guys though so in my mind it is not achievable. Sorry.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 2:14 pm 2:14 pm
Posted by: Huh | Nov 9, 2009 2:08:08 PM
Yikes. That’ll take me a few hours to digest.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 2:17 pm 2:17 pm
Posted by: Flash Override | Nov 9, 2009 1:53:45 PM
I knew I was taking a risk by advocating Reagan.
Posted by: Skip | November 9, 2009, 2:22 pm 2:22 pm
The president dithers while Iran presses on, men die in Afghanistan and millions lose their jobs:
Obama’s focus on health care when the economy is still so fragile and unemployment moving toward double digits could make it appear that the administration has its priorities confused. While affordable health care is important to Americans, making a living is more immediately urgent. Yet the administration’s efforts to date on this more basic concern have been neither particularly visible nor coherent. It’s hard for most people to understand that unemployment would be worse were it not for the stimulus package; the much-flaunted new “green jobs” have not appeared yet, nor are they likely to for years. The White House has had equal difficulty explaining to Main Street why it would be far worse off today had Wall Street’s biggest banks not been bailed out. Almost nothing has trickled down. Small businesses still can’t get loans.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | November 9, 2009, 2:55 pm 2:55 pm
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | Nov 9, 2009 2:55:15 PM
Personally, I think the President has ADD.
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm
How many times do we have to hear the Iranians say that they will not ship their enriched uranium out of country before we believe them? I can recall hearing several senior Iranians saying that there is no deal over the past several weeks, but it seems like the Obama admin is not getting the hint.
Posted by: Jason | November 9, 2009, 3:06 pm 3:06 pm
I can recall hearing several senior Iranians saying that there is no deal over the past several weeks, but it seems like the Obama admin is not getting the hint.
__________________________________
The United States is not negotiating this in isolation. This is being done with the participation of other major players on the world stage.
The approach is very straight forward, attempt to negotiate a favorable solution, and then if that fails (which we will know with the next few weeks) move on the next level of heavier sanctions.
You ‘bomb them’ types can just hold onto your underwear for a while – there are real human beings over there, including the ones who’ve been protesting against their government.
Posted by: tierra | November 9, 2009, 4:11 pm 4:11 pm
The approach is very straight forward, attempt to negotiate a favorable solution, and then if that fails (which we will know with the next few weeks) move on the next level of heavier sanctions.
Posted by: tierra | Nov 9, 2009 4:11:51 PM
Looking forward to it. I sure hope the world can pull this one out! It’s a real nailbiter!
Posted by: Visualize Whirled Peas | November 9, 2009, 4:34 pm 4:34 pm
What do you mean the could fail, they WILL fail, they just keep stalling year after year, this latest secret facility would have been the last straw for a sane world.
Posted by: CC | November 9, 2009, 5:39 pm 5:39 pm
Malaise is at hand. This guy is a loser.
Posted by: Fascist Hyena | November 9, 2009, 8:16 pm 8:16 pm
This guy is a loser. – -*
Posted by: neozaa | November 10, 2009, 2:22 am 2:22 am
Joseph Goebbels, the Nazi propaganda minister said “If you tell a lie big enough and keep repeating it, people will eventually come to believe it.” This is exactly the maxim being adopted by Israeli leaders who are spreading lies, disinformation and half-truths about Iran in order to get the madman in Washington D.C. and his gang of neocons and war criminals to attack another Muslim country on Israel’s behalf.
Posted by: Alan | November 10, 2009, 11:46 am 11:46 am