LyrArc Article Gist
The Obama administration started the first term in office with efforts at reaching agreement on reducing nuclear arsenals. By the second term of the Obama administration the talks were already faltering. The war in Syria and Iraq and other conflicts in the Ukraine led to worsening relations with Russia. During the first year of the Trump administration that followed the two Obama terms in office the situation is completely reversed from what it was in 2008, showing that more than good intentions are needed to pave the way for reducing nuclear weapons. The expansion of NATO to Russian borders, the conflict in the Ukraine, the sanctions that hurt the Russian economy in Obama's second term did more to destabilize relations. The Trump administration's ambivalence towards Russia is not seen in the way the U.S. is responding to Russia'a policy actions to expand its nuclear weapons capabilities.

LyrArc Article Gist
It is hard to imagine that one is even writing about this, as shocking as it is- the 4 or 5 minutes between a decision to launch nuclear weapons and the end of life on this planet earth as we know it. Here Sam Nunn, a U.S. senator who was part of the negotiations for arms control and who is the leading American in this field talks about the unimaginable danger. He says the strategy from the Cold War where Russia and the U.S. put their nuclear forces in a position to be launched within minutes, 4 to 5 minutes, is outdated and needs to be changed. Hillary Clinton described the issue in the television debate. Yet this was not discussed because of the nature of the 2016 presidential election with lack of serious discussion.  And both Nunn and Clinton emphasize that once the missiles are in the air they cannot be ordered to go back. Accidental error, judgemental error, informational error in which one side thinks the other has launched a missile, a firing by mistake, are possible. In this situation Nunn says Trump is temperamentally unfit, and Clinton is fit to take on the responsibility. Yet the question this raises is as Nunn signals- is anyone but God fit to make this decision to launch nuclear weapons. Nunn says it is outdated and wrong to have only a few minutes, as such a decision cannot be made in a few hours or days, much less in 5 minutes. Nunn brings up a discussion he had in Moscow when he brought this up with Russians and president Putin. Russian president Putin told Nunn that he was fully aware of this. Putin's response was- "Senator Nunn, at some point it becomes automatic."  Nunn does not clarify what this means, or what Putin means to say. For people on the planet it is not enough to have Reagan, Gorbachev, Clinton, as Nunn mentions being responsible people for a nuclear decision. The current state of affairs is simply shocking and the lack of attention to this is also shocking. Equally dangerous is that 20 countries have weapons usable nuclear material, and sophisticated hacking of command and control processes is another danger.       ...

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
DJT says Iran does not want to talk to the Europeans, it wants to talk to the Americans. He says it is hard to stop the war when one side is winning. Russia and the US have better relations than under the Biden administration which is proving to be an important factor in this war. As it is about nuclear proliferation, not regional powers- the Israelis, the Saudis and the Iranians. Both Russia and the US are technologically sophisticated powers with different interests, they are world powers because they have first and foremost important responsibilities in nuclear non proliferation and the health of the planet. By allowing regional conflict in Eastern Europe to cloud this fact and not engage with Russia as a world power the US under Obama and Biden had failed to grasp a key principle of peaceful relations since World War II. We argue that "western powers" is a concept of colonial powers France and Britain, and western civilization is the reliable concept that includes Russia, and includes China and India that have embraced the creation of the modern world by western civilization. ...

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.