Iran talks: hope or "red line" time?

By Steve Hynd

After Obama and Netanyahu's meeting, it appears there'll be no unilateral Israeli attack on Iran just yet. And today there's news that there's to be a new round of negotiations between the P5+1 and Iran, plus Iran is looking to grant limited access for IAEA inspectors to the Parchin military base. All good, Right?

No, Iran isn't exactly out from under the threat of preventative war yet.

The Guardian reveals why the talks will likely fail, before they've even begun. Sarkozy's taking the hard line.

French officials argued that in order to satisfy Israel that all was being done to resolve the nuclear crisis by peaceful means, the international response would have to make it absolutely clear that the talks would have to end with the "full implementation" of UN security council resolutions calling for the suspension of uranium enrichment. That language was spelt out in Ashton's latest letter.

In my humble opinion, there's no way Iran will agree to such a thing. It would be a domestic political disaster as well as a crippling submission in the eyes of the world. So if France sticks to its demand and the rest of the P5+1 agree, then the talks will fail (probably with Iran being blamed for the failure, as ever).

After that? Well, Michael Tomasky is spot-on about Obama's rhetoric at AIPAC probably not being the most auspicious.

the important part of the speech, the sentences that historians might be ruing and Americans regretting 15 years from now, was this: “Iran’s leaders should understand that I do not have a policy of containment; I have a policy to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon. And as I have made clear time and again during the course of my presidency, I will not hesitate to use force when it is necessary to defend the United States and its interests.”

Here’s why this is important. Ironclad vows like this tend to lock a nation into a position from which it cannot later retreat. If you were already thinking “Truman Doctrine,” give yourself a point.

When Obama speaks today about a "window of opportunity' for Iran, he includes implicitly the notion that the window will close at some stage, and over the last two days he's made it impossible to walk that notion back. If these new talks fail, he's going to be under immense pressure to say Iran's "last chance" has finally come and gone, whether or not there's an actual nuclear weapon "red line" in evidence.

Comments

[Ron Beasley]

I really don't think there will be an attack on Iran. Both the US and Israeli military oppose it. The Israeli people are more concerned about blowback from an attack than they are a nuclear Iran. Obama knows an attack would crash the world economy.

[geoff]

You almost wish they, our know it all elites, would order a go and stop the bloody nonsense, pontification and general load of merde they circulate to our outstanding media stenographers as accurate news. If it truly would crash the world economy the silver lining could be that our lords and masters may figuratively be paraded through the streets of our capitals in tumbrils and accepted by common citizens for the blowhard blood lust freaks they are.