- Joined
- Apr 18, 2013
- Messages
- 94,358
- Reaction score
- 82,750
- Location
- Barsoom
- Gender
- Male
- Political Leaning
- Independent
By The Associated Press | April 3, 2015
The United States, Iran and five other world powers announced a deal Thursday outlining limits on Iran's nuclear program so it cannot lead to atomic weapons. Negotiators now have to take that deal and shape it into a final accord by June 30. The agreement says that "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed."
Simpleχity;1064490997 said:On the whole, I consider the JCPOA a fairly robust framework. As the agreement mentions however, "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed"
There remains much to be worked out in detail. I am not happy with the 1 year breakout period. I think this should be 18 months minimum. I am also not happy that a new UN Security Council resolution will have to be implemented. This allows Russia and China, who oftentimes take the Iranian position, to act as Iranian UNSC proxies. A murky "dispute resolution process" regarding significant non-compliance issues will also be implemented. What exactly does "significant" allude to in this regard?
The Iranians have already termed a fact sheet published by the US State Department (OP link) spin ... because details have not yet been negotiated and wholly agreed upon.
I am also surprised at what Iran has tentatively accepted in the framework. There are things that need tweaking and better definition, but this is far more than I originally envisioned.But I must admit that I am surprised at the quality of the deal framework, as it is shaping up. And, though, I would want points like the above worked on, I at present think the thing could be much better than I had expected. I am still thinking about it.
Agreed. Even this initial framework will be a tough sell to Iranian hard-liners.But the main thing is whether the Persians really mean it.
Anyone willing to put money that the only thing agreed to by June 30th is to keep working till September 30th?
Simpleχity;1064491048 said:I am also surprised at what Iran has tentatively accepted in the framework. There are things that need tweaking and better definition, but this is far more than I originally envisioned.
Agreed. Even this initial framework will be a tough sell to Iranian hard-liners.
Is that what you are hoping for?
I'm fairly sure Khamenei was appraised. Beyond that however, is a guessing game.You speak as though the "hard liners" were out of the loop in the negotiations. I appreciate your acknowledgement in the robust nature of the framework. FOX was incapable of the same, despite their "fair and balanced" nature.
Simpleχity;1064492740 said:I'm fairly sure Khamenei was appraised. Beyond that however, is a guessing game.
It's not much of a stretch to speculate that not everyone in the regime will be thrilled with the framework parameters.
I don't know anything for certain. Just sensible guesses using deductive reasoning and basic logic.How do you know this?
Simpleχity;1064492900 said:I don't know anything for certain. Just sensible guesses using deductive reasoning and basic logic.
Simpleχity;1064490997 said:On the whole, I consider the JCPOA a fairly robust framework. As the agreement mentions however, "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed"
There remains much to be worked out in detail. I am not happy with the 1 year breakout period. I think this should be 18 months minimum. I am also not happy that a new UN Security Council resolution will have to be implemented. This allows Russia and China, who oftentimes take the Iranian position, to act as Iranian UNSC proxies. A murky "dispute resolution process" regarding significant non-compliance issues will also be implemented. What exactly does "significant" allude to in this regard?
The Iranians have already termed a fact sheet published by the US State Department (OP link) spin ... because details have not yet been negotiated and wholly agreed upon.
Simpleχity;1064492740 said:I'm fairly sure Khamenei was appraised. Beyond that however, is a guessing game.
It's not much of a stretch to speculate that not everyone in the regime will be thrilled with the framework parameters.
France has already said they were expecting stronger controls on Iran and, as you implied, Iran seems to be fully prepared to act on their version of the eventual deal.
Their negotiator has been hailed a hero and given a damn parade.
Under no reading or interpretation of these terms can anyone conclude Iran has committed to not developing a nuclear weapon.
Postponement of a breakout is hardly of much comfort, especially when the sanctions will be effectively gone (any sanctions the USA may have kept in place will be laughed at) and Iran can just say nevermind we built one anyway at any time since inspections are a joke too.
Are you telling us that *everyone* in the regime is aware of all negotiation nuances? Are you telling us that there are no regime hard-liners who oppose any concessions? Are you telling us that there are no hard-liners who prefer enduring the sanctions if the end result is an Iranian nuclear weapon? Are you telling us that the Iranian political spectrum is a unitary monolith?But to me basic logic would be that the Ayatollahs are directing the negotiations. If they aren't, then apparently there's more hope for Iran than people give credit.
Despite the naysayers and novitiates above, the framework is indeed a good platform to build upon.Seems like a good place to work from, hopefully they'll actually agree to it.
Simpleχity;1064494669 said:Are you telling us that *everyone* in the regime is aware of all negotiation nuances? Are you telling us that there are no regime hard-liners who oppose any concessions? Are you telling us that there are no hard-liners who prefer enduring the sanctions if the end result is an Iranian nuclear weapon? Are you telling us that the Iranian political spectrum is a unitary monolith?
The regime hard-liners will have to be convinced to accept whatever Khamenei decides upon ... either by reason or by fiat.
I wouldn't say directing negotiations like a conductor commands an orchestra. As negotiations enter each different phase, there is probably a home-consultation regarding a minimalist position, but everything above this bottom-line position is available to the negotiator. This sort of latitude methodology is probably true for Kerry also.But sense we're both going by our guts, or basic common sense as you stated, who ever counts or has the final say in Iran is directing the negotiations.
There is no doubt that there are still some major points to fix. And you are absolutely right that the 1 year breakout clause is disturbing, as a future President would have to act within a time frame that would make unilateral war almost inevitable, should Iran decide to go off course at some later date. This problem could easily be exacerbated by the sweeteners of automatic kick-in of sanctions. Russia and Germany would invariably argue to wait and see, how the sanctions worked giving Iran the time it needed. There are other things as well.
But I must admit that I am surprised at the quality of the deal framework, as it is shaping up. And, though, I would want points like the above worked on, I at present think the thing could be much better than I had expected. I am still thinking about it.
But the main thing is whether the Persians really mean it.
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?
We use cookies and similar technologies for the following purposes:
Do you accept cookies and these technologies?