LyrArc Article Gist
The P5+1 talks with Iran are stalled and not ending in agreement by August 2012. The former head of military intelligence of Israel, says the Obama administration needs to tell the Israeli parliament Knesset directly that preventing a nuclear Iran is a U.S. interest and the U.S. will take military action if needed. He points out that the U.S. with its larger operational capabilities can take additional time compared to the Israeli capabilities, but this goes against Israel's creed of not relying on the U.S. for its defense or outsourcing defense. For the Israelis to rely on the U.S. it needs this clear committment and statement of intention. In addition the Obama administration needs to take five steps to reassure Israel says Yadlin: a statement to Congress in writing that the president reserves the right to take military action, increased military presence in the gulf, provide advanced military technology and intelligence to Israel to enlarge Israel's window for military action in exchange for giving sanctions and diplomacy more time, talk publicly about the dangers of reconstitution of Iran's nuclear program, and commit to the security of U.S. allies in the gulf. The strategy Yadlin emphasizes is that if this is going to work for a peaceful goal, preparing for war is essential....

LyrArc Article Gist
India has reduced imports of oil from Iran from 12% in 2011 to about 9% by the end of April, 2012. A senior state department official from the U.S., Carlos Pascual, will be in India in mid May 2012 to assess the energy situation and see what specific energy facilities in India need to do. Some of the refineries in India are designed to handle only the kind of heavy oil Iran supplies. For the U.S. the issue is keeping up the pressure on Iran during the talks in Istanbul, Turkey, on Iran's nuclear program. For India it has the vital trade and economic relationship with the U.S. balanced against cultural ties to the region and the need for oil supplies.

LyrArc Article Gist
Pierre Razoux, a French historian provides this account of the Iran-Iraq war that lasted from 1980 to 1988, at a cost of 680,000 people killed and $1.1 trillion in war destruction and money diverted from the economy. In 1980 Saddam Hussein of Iraq launched the war by attacking Iran which had just come under the Ayatollah Khomeini with the fall of the Shah of Iran in 1979. The war dragged on for 8 years with Khomeini persisting in the war. With U.S. and Saudi policy to increase production bringing the price of oil down from $30 to $10 designed to bring Iran and Iraq to the peace talks, as well as the Soviet Union to withdraw from Afghanistan, all three being major oil producers. The dollar also weakened by 37% during this period. The diplomatic isolation of the Khomeini regime made it more difficult for Iran to buy arms on credit than Iraq could, leading to the war ending with Iran finding it no longer possible to continue the human losses. The Carter administration, particularly with National Security Advisor Brzezinski, tilted towards Iraq to oppose Soviets in Afghanistan, and the Saudis also supported Iraq during the early period. Under president Reagan the U.S. began covert and direct assistance to Iraq to prevent an Iraqi defeat early in the war. Rumsfeld visited Baghdad in December 1983 and March 1984 to organize the U.S. effort to oppose Iran. This may have laid the seeds for future conflicts that lasted through the administrations of the elder and junior Bush. As Razoux points out the Revolutionary Guards became entrenched from this period in Iran's history, making it difficult for election process to work or elected governments to operate. 23 months following the end of that war in 1988 Saddam Hussein launched a war on Kuwait, leading to the U.S. led Gulf war and the entry of the U.S. into a ground combat role, which was followed by the invasion of Iraq under George Bush after 9/11 attacks. The twin wars in Afghanistan and Iraq are estimated to have cost the U.S. over 1 trillion dollars. The result today is largely the division on the ground into Shia regions under the Revolutionary Guards and the Shiite government in Baghdad, and Sunni regions led by Islamic State and autonomous Iraqi Sunni tribes, ignoring the Iran-Iraq boundaries set in the colonial period by the French and the British. In all the amount spent in the Khomeini-Saddam war of $ 1 trillion being about $2 trillion in today's money, and the $1 trillion spent by the U.S., means about $3 trillion has gone into the wars in this region. This comes at a time of deficits in government budgets in the U.S. and a deep recession in the U.S. and Europe. It also explains why the U.S. public is reluctant to take even the minor action such as giving a standoff "no-fly zone" protection to the rebels in Syria, and supported the Obama administration in its reluctance to keep even the basic military force in place to protect its diplomatic mission in Libya, where the cost would be small relative to earlier enlarged military missions under the two elder and junior Bush administrations. The result is that refugees are pouring into Europe from Syria and Libya, through Turkey. Turkey itself is host to millions of refugees in camps along its border. The vacuum and the withdrawal of the Obama administration from the region has led to the rise of Islamic State with covert assistance from Sunni regimes in the region to counteract the growing influence of Shiite Iran. It also may explain the Iranian people's support for the nuclear weapons effort through years of sanctions, leading finally to an agreement with the Obama administration that relaxes sanctions in exchange for a future possibility of acquiring nuclear weapons. Lost in the conflict is the Arab Spring of 2012-2013, with the Tunisian democracy the only surviving result of that movement for democracy and awakening among Arab peoples. The Reagan administration in its aggressive anti-Soviet position made large errors- including ignoring human rights abuses and use of chemical weapons in the Iran-Iraq war, by supporting Iraq and reversing position after Iraq's invasion of Kuwait, having a disastrous effect on the entire region decades later. Much of the Obama administration's reluctance for any action may stem from the U.S. role in this period and its consequences of protracted conflict. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
Former senior directors in the National Security Council in the Bush administration who talk about a a complete change in policy towards Iran- changing policies pursued all the way back to President Carter and Reagan and the Ayatollah Khomeini government. New policy would be implemented through hard work on diplomatic negotiations to bring Iran and the U.S. closer by tackling many of the differences. The U.S. recognizing the Iran government and its interests in the region and Iran cooperating on the nuclear isssue to safeguard against nuclear proliferation. What this means is that the portion of oil price increases that are a result of political volatility, with Iran as one of the sources of the political volatility, will be affected as the political volatility from this source is reduced significantly. Also note recent news about Petrochina signing an agreement with Iran to develop large Iranian oil fields. This was a different aspect of the oil price increase as the lack of modernization and investment to develop oil fields in countries like Iran, Venezuela and Mexico was a problem on the supply side. In the case of Iran there was a squeeze as demand was growing inside these countries at the same time as there wasn't enough investment in the oil fields. Chinese participation means that this problem is being addressed differently from that if the western oil majors were involved, but still being addressed. Over time this should be part of contributing factors that are becoming evident for less price pressures. However it should also be noted that these changes will take some time to work their way. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
President Biden faces three potential crises this month -one in Ukraine with a buildup of Russian forces for potential invasion, Chinese actions with Taiwan, and potential collapse of Iran nuclear talks. Biden also convenes this week world leaders of democracies in virtual talks on how to respond to actions of Russia, China, Iran and other countries. Biden's goal is to ensure the US and its allies remain strong without provoking crises.

LyrArc Article Gist
Sanger, Erlanger and Rudoren describe in detail the differing interests of Congress, the Obama administration, the Iranian hardliners around Khamanei, the Israelis, the Europeans, and the Russians each quietly pushing its own interests. Beyond the physics of a deal, a Republican Congress, Democrat Obama and Iranian hardliner Khamanei, each are trying to get their own narrative to look right with public opinion they face, that they have not backed down. The Israelis find any deal unacceptable and reject even a small lifting of sanctions, because of the "existential" threat. Add to this Sunni Saudi Arabia which says it will match Shiite Iranian capabilities with their own uranium enrichment facilities if Iran is allowed to retain capabilities. And economic interests also figure into this- Russian interest is in keeping Iranian oil off the market as long as possible so that oil prices do not fall further in 2015, which means delay an agreement as long as possible. The French see the Obama administration as likely to give too much away for an agreement and want tougher terms....

LyrArc Article Gist
Hard liners in the Iranian parliament include Hamid Rasaee and Ali Taheri, and other members from the days of president Ahamdinejad. In the media this includes Hosssein Shariatmadari, editor of newspaper Kayhan. They oppose any concessions in nuclear negotiations by Javad Zarif, Iran's foreign minister, and any cooperation with the U.S. on issues related to Syria and Iraq. As negotiations face another deadline of March 25, 2015, Israel and the U.S. Congress are pushing for a ratcheting up of sanctions, while the Obama administration seeks more time to complete negotiations. Iran's supreme leader Ayatollah Khamanei has urged conservative critics to avoid discussion of negotiations, also setting low expectations for settlement.

LyrArc Article Gist
The nuclear deal reached in the 2013 Geneva negotiations between Iran and the EU, U.S., Russia, France, Germany, UK and China, a diplomatic bloc named the P5+1. Iran gets sanctions relief that would bring in an additional $6-7 billion dollars. In return Iran agrees to increased International Atomic Energy Agency inspections of the heavy water reactor in Arak, to not start the facility or lead it with nuclear fuel. Earlier France had pushed for a complete dismantling of that reactor. Iran will cap its uranium enrichment to levels needed only for fuel in a reactor, of 3.5%-5%, and maintain its total low enriched nuclear fuel at the current level of about 6 tons for the six month period in which further negotiations will take place. As the EU representative put it, this provides the time and space to reach a serious deal. It does not ship out and destroy the estimated 19,000 centrifuge machines in Iran to produce nuclear fuel. A sticking point was Iran's insistence that it has a right to develop and use nuclear energy for peaceful purposes, which Iran says is part of the UN Nuclear Nonproliferation Treaty....

LyrArc Article Gist
Thomas Erdbrink provides a detailed report on the Iranian side in the negotiations and the initiative of Ayatollah Khamanei in opening up discussions with the Obama administration in Oman. The result was an opening for private talks betwen Iran and the U.S., parallel to the P5+1 negotiations with Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
The Iranian view on the negotiations to resolve questions about Iran's nuclear program with the U.S. and European countries in Istanbul, Turkey. This view is from Ali Akbar Salehi, Foreign Minister of Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
Mark Landler on the Obama administration's view of the nuclear deal wih Iran at the Geneva talks in November 2013.

LyrArc Article Gist
The tense relations between Saudis and Iran in Jan 2016 with severing of diplomatic ties following the execution of a Shiite cleric from eastern Saudi Arabia.

LyrArc Article Gist
The P5+1 countries in the Istanbul talks with Iran are the five permanent members of the Security Council and Germany. Catherine Ashton, the EU's senior foreign policy official is the lead negotiator. Saeed Jalili is the lead Iranian negotiator. By July the two groups have held three rounds of talks which proved inconclusive and were lowered to meetings at the deputy level in July, 2012. This was followed by bellicose statements from Iran and U.S. defense preparations in the Gulf of Hormuz. The Israelis described the situation as reaching a critical point, with the U.S. continuing to put its faith in tighter sanctions to persuade Iran to give up its program.

LyrArc Article Gist
Friedman highlights the importance of an interview with President Obama by Atlantic magazine's Jeffrey Goldberg. In this interview Obama gives a thoughtful understanding of what it means if Iran acquires nuclear weapons. The greatest danger is in nuclear proliferation. Obama brings to this an understanding of this issue from the time he focussed on this issue as a student at Columbia University, when he described the risks of nuclear proliferation in the Columbia student newspaper. There is the risk of an escalation in the development of nuclear weapons in the Middle East first, and then elsewhere. And there is the risk that nuclear weapons fall into the wrong hands. The situation would create problems like that faced in North Korea or in the India-Pakistan region, but increased by many times the current dangers. The entire nuclear de-proliferation effort and the efforts to de-nuclearize weapons stockpiles that took decades to accomplish with the Soviet Union could come undone- and it would then be necessary for all countries to invest in advanced technologies for defending against nuclear weapons, setting in motion another arms race. The current situation reminds people that the issues raised by nuclear weapons development will always be with us, and require a worldwide concerted effort, at official and public level, bringing in scientists, public opinion worldwide, and educating the public in all countries of the larger danger to mankind. The issues need to be put in the right context beyond nations and politics, beyond international conflicts and competing interests or ideologies, including Israel, Iran and any other nation looking for nuclear weapons as a solution for conflicts. Shultz, Perry, Kissinger and Nunn after a series of meetings at the Hoover Institution called for the update of the old policies of nuclear deterrance based on mutually assured destruction used with the Soviet Union, to reflect the new threat of terrorism- in an op-ed NYT 3/7/2011. The focus of this effort is on a new Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty, with all nations giving up nuclear material to an international nuclear material bank. Senator Obama strongly supported the efforts of Senators Lugar and Nunn in de-proliferation work after the collapse of the Soviet Union and joined the senators on one of their trips- Broad and Sanger, NYT, 7/5/2009. A major effort to reduce NATO, U.S. and Soviet nuclear weapons is called for to lead by example, providing a framework for other means of settling regional conflicts and educating public opinion in these countries, and moving forward the negotiating of the Fissile Material Cutoff Treaty. In many ways public opinion will have to lead the way in all countries as governments can lag behind- the efforts of Sam Nunn and Dick Lugar and the many unnamed people in the Soviet Union who aided their efforts show the importance of this....