generalspeaking

In Cheerful Mutual Agreement

"Reaching from 200 centrifuges to about 20,000 under the most unfair sanctions in the last ten years we demonstrate our capability".
Mohammad Javad Zarif, Iranian foreign ministry

The negotiations taking place and concluding in Geneva on November 24 between the G5+1 and Tehran, initiated in large part by the United States succeeded in putting off for another day in the relatively near future, a decision which will have to be made by force of circumstances gone beyond any measure of control.

The implemented sanctions imposed upon the Islamic Republic of Iran, incremental and damaging to its economy, were functioning fairly well in their purpose.

America's Commander in Chief felt he was capable of engineering a quicker fix to a vexing international problem, and so he instructed his administration elite to proceed with that quick fix. It is instructive beyond measure to be aware that the great American public has lost its great fixation on the prospect of elevating a man who promised hope and urged audacity upon voters to bring him to the White House to change the United States and by extension the world, for the better.

The American public may have been lulled into an enchanting sense of complacency and trust, humming to themselves the catchy sound-bites of a man whose oratory moved and spellbound them to his promise of a new day dawning. That new day has dawned and they are no longer spellbound; they are furious with the indignation of those whose trust has been betrayed.

On the domestic scene, with a body politic that has gone into revolt, and a population that has kicked itself in the head to release the common sense they had abandoned to vague promises.

Trust has been replaced by resentment and anger. Americans feel betrayed and more vulnerable to hurt and harm currently under their presidential incumbent than at any time in the not-so-distant past. It would seem that their political executive has betrayed them no less than they have the international community, with the sole exception of financiers, banks, global oil and post-national manufacturing enterprises

In Iran, its new president Hassan Rouhani asserts the six-month deal explicitly recognizes Iran's right to uranium enrichment, removing the threat of military strike on his country. "The fact is the president maintains the option to use force and he has said, specifically, he has not taken that threat off the table", refuted John Kerry.

This is obviously an agreement whose nebulous wording has given impetus to interpretation that suits either side's meaning.

Both sides, Tehran and Washington, felt themselves to have been pressed into a corner; the agreement, ambiguously worded, was designed to provide squirm-room for the Iranian and the American presidents both. Mr. Rouhani speaks quietly and confidently to his hardline critics, delivering a more palatable message of intent and fallout.

Mr. Obama speaks pleadingly to both the Republicans and the Democrats in the Congress and Senate to give his particular kind of peace a chance. Pressure in the United States and throughout Europe by manufacturing and oil interests fed up with taking a hit on their profits to score political points for their very own national governments attempting to bolster nuclear non-proliferation hasn't been a runaway hit.

Both presidents played to the fiction that the gesture of victory they both claimed would lead to a successful six months of cleaving to the uncertain guidelines of the agreement, ultimately leading to a far greater victory with a final, more conclusive negotiation process when the six months success has elapsed.

The facts are different; though Iran's nuclear program will not come to a shuddering halt, a fact that President Obama acknowledges, he insists it will not proceed to the Islamic regime acquiring nuclear weapons. As far as the Islamic Republic's point of view is concerned, Iran had successfully imposed, through its exquisite diplomatic negotiating skills, its nuclear rights on the backward Western powers seeking to deny it its inalienable rights.

President Obama and his Secretary of State John Kerry have assured Israel and Saudi Arabia that their concerns are overwrought and unreasonable in nature, though conceding that they had reason to fret given past circumstances. The U.S. they stress, has committed on strict monitoring and verification. Unsurprisingly, that message hasn't much ameliorated the fears of reality that assail Israel and Saudi Arabia.

Alwaleed bin Talal one of he most influential figures in the Arab world, charged that the Obama administration had been manipulated by Iran, a country far more dangerous to the Middle East, he said, than Israel. "Sunni Muslims were hostile to Shia-dominated Iran. Arabs would love to witness an Israeli strike on the country."



But the principals are given to saying a whole lot of things respecting the value and trustworthiness of the signed negotiation, an event that had all six of the bargainers hugging one another with relief and the pleasure of accomplishment after the fact.

"You don't trust. It's not based on trust. It's based on verification", vowed Mr. Kerry.

"We do not trust them. However, we are determined to continue our negotiations and solve the issue", vowed Mohammad Javad Zarif.

Labels: Capitulation, G5+1, Iran, Israel, Negotiations, Nuclear Technology, Saudi Arabia, Security, United States

posted by Pieface @ Wednesday, December 04, 2013