LyrArc Article Gist
Israel's ambassador to the U.S., Michael Oren, describes Iran's efforts to make weapons grade nuclear material, escalating the enrichment process from 3.5% to 20%. He says Iran now has 225 pounds of 20% uranium and 11,000 pounds of 3.5%, enough for 5 nuclear bombs, and points out that 20% uranium can be enhanced to weapons grade in weeks. During the initial negotiations the P5+1 nations demanded suspension of enrichment acitivites at a time when the enrichment process was at 3.5%, and transfer of stockpiles abroad. As negotiations dragged on Iran escalated to 20% enrichment. current demands of the P5+1 are for cessation of 20% enrichment and removal of the 20% stockpile, and closing the facility at Qom, as a first step. This has been rejected by Iran. In this op-ed Oren says Israel alerted the world about the Iranian nuclear program 20 years ago, and as this has continued to what it is today, Israel's view is that much of that time was wasted and the window for international efforts to cease and dismantle Iran's nuclear program is almost shut. ...

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
The reduction in tensions between the U.S. and Iran after the beginning of talks in Istanbul in April 2012. Other factors include differences within Iranian leadership and government leading to more flexible positions and differences within the Israeli leadership. Iranian and Israeli public opinion is moving in the direction of moderate positions.

LyrArc Article Gist
In this WSJ op-ed, Michael Oren, Israel's former ambassador to the U.S. 2009-2013, describes the difficult moments in the Israel- U.S. relationship during the 7 years of the Obama administration. He says prime minister Netayahu made mistakes, but president Obama acted deliberately against Israel's interests. Oren says two core principles of the Israel-U.S. relationship, that of "no daylight" or no open disagreements, and "no surprises," were broken during the two terms of the Obama administration. One such moment says Oren was in May 2011, when Obama endorsed the 1967 lines with land swaps- a former Palestinian position- as basis for peace-making. M. Netanyahu was seen as lecturing the U.S. president about this the next day, according to Oren, because he was assured by the Israeli ambassador that this was not going to happen and it came as a surprise to Netanyahu.

LyrArc Article Gist
A shift in Israeli opinion towards greater use of sanctions after antigovernment protests in Iran with deteriorating economic conditions and a 40% decline in the value of the rial. Merchants and ordinary citizens from the middle class are now joining the students and young people who led the protests in 2011.

LyrArc Article Gist
Prof. Dershowitz says a stronger statement to Iran was warranted than that contained in President Obama's address at the General Assembly in Sept. 2012. Iranian president Ahmadinejad stated in his address that Israel will be "eliminated."

LyrArc Article Gist
The 1953 coup that toppled the elected Mossadegh government was supported and attributed to planning by the CIA. During a cold war with the Soviet Union countries in the middle were considered expendable by either side. Added to this was the interest of big oil companies similiar to the Anglo-French response in the Suez Canal crisis of 1956. This still rankles with Iranians. In response to the election of President Obama and his offer for an open discussion the Iranian President Ahmedinejad calls for an apology for that coup and the toppling of an elected government. This led to replacing it with the Shah's monarchy which was overthrown in 1979 after 26 years.

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. Defense Secretary, Leon Panetta, held three way talks with Egypt's president, Mohamed Morsi and the head of the military, Hussein Tantawi. Panetta said of Morsi- " I was convinced that President Morsi is his own man." Panetta said Morsi is committed to democratic reforms and representing all Egyptians. President Morsi sent a letter to Israeli president Shimon Peres expressing deep thanks for a Ramadan greeting and expressing hope for new peace talks with the Palestinians. The U.S. preparations for a potential conflict with Iran and the civil war in Syria to oust the Assad regime have given new urgency to reduce tensions in Egypt between the different factions including the military.

LyrArc Article Gist
Nawaf Obaid, a fellow of the Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs at Harvard University's Kennedy School of Government, is also senior fellow at the King Faisal Center for Research and Islamic Studies. Here he describes the events leading to the Saudi turndown of a seat on the UN Security Council. The Saudi foreign policy establishment made this decision after several weeks of debate in Jeddah considering the U.S. and Russia's effort to make only a muted criticism of the use of chemical weapons in Syria in the Security Council; and the U.S. effort to have the British, French and Saudis give up on demands for firm language in a Security Council resolution on action to be taken against the use of chemical weapons. For the Saudis, says Obaid, better not taking a temporary seat on the UN Security Council, than to be left a docile member without its own voice and the voice of others in the international community being heard. Obaid also points out that this is the beginning of Saudi effort to exercize its own influence in the Middle East, as it faces three separate developments in 2013- the Iranian rapprochement with the West under new president Rouhani, the Arab Awakening and the new consciousness in the Middle East, the U.S. policy under president Obama of not taking leadership in the Middle East. This also comes as the Saudis parted ways with the Obama administration on the role of the military in Egypt, and has differences with Turkey and Quatar on support for Islamic groups in Egypt and Syria....

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....

LyrArc Article Gist
Mitt Romney on the weaknesses of America's position in the Middle East in policies for Syria, Libya, Egypt and the rest of the Arab world. The problems with Iran and the lack of results in bringing an end to Iran's nuclear program.

LyrArc Article Gist
A slight shift in American opinion favoring a deal with Iran is shown in a WSJ/NBC poll in July 2015 compared to the poll in April 2015. Support for reaching a nuclear deal with Iran remains stable at 36% in both polls, the opposed drops by 6 percentage points to 17% from 23%, and the percentage of people who say they do not know enough to formulate an opinion goes up to 46% from 40%. The intricacies of a nuclear technology deal and the sites involved lead to a high percentage of don't know enough to give an opinion. Factors hindering a deal include inspection of military sites, and Iranian intentions. Factors favoring reaching a deal now is the risk that this would mean Iran would go back into isolation and the opportunity to work with moderates might be lost. The Rouhani administration was an effort by voters to elect a government that could ease or remove sanctions to improve the economy and living conditions- its failure would lead to Iran losing an opportunity to open up to the world. The pressure from the U.S. Congress and Israel served to push for a verifiable and effective agreement to control development of nuclear technology for weapons systems. Behavioural factors involved are the very young population in Iran which has no memories about the period before the revolution in 1979- 70% of the population of 74 million are people under the age of 35. This group is eager for ties to the outside and could change Iran's outlook and policies int the future towards moderation. Risks in not reaching a deal also include the possibility of the Saudis developing nuclear technology and nuclear proliferation. Winners from a deal because of the flow of Iranian oil to world markets and a period of extended low oil prices are the U.S., Europe, China and India. Germany gains new markets to replace the growth in the Russian market after sanctions. Lifting of an arms embargo, an added risk in the last days of the talks, would be mitigated by making the lifting of that embargo very gradual....

LyrArc Article Gist
Von Mark Schieritz of Germany's Zeit Online describes the changes underway following the election campaigns in the U.S., and France, and the Brexit vote in Britain, all signalling the discontent of people left behind by the tech, capitalism, trade and globalization changes of the last two decades. The appeal of one time fringe politicians using racist slogans and divisive rhetoric to appeal to those left behind, appealing to people lacking intergenerational mobility, and without much hope for a better future, is a serious concern. People who are gullible enough, lack college education, or racially isolated so that they are not likely to look carefully at what is being offered in terms of programs and change of competing parties, and likely to overlook the hard and difficult road for corrective course of action, because of anger and pentup fears. Schieritz cites as part of this change the unanimously approved conclusion in its final declaration at the G-20 meeting in Chengdu, China- "The benefits of growth need to be shared more broadly within and among countries to promote inclusiveness." Yet this can be a sort of "too little, too late."  Bankers who are cited in an email going around Wall Street lack credibility with groups on Main Street, to people adversely affected by tech, trade and globalization changes that have been persistently ignored for over a decade, close to two decades. More convincing is the tone of Theresa May, the British prime minister's first statement outside 10 Downing Street- who spoke of the "burning injustices" and her determination to make this a top priority of her government. Still more convincing are the programs to invest $275 billion over 10 years in infrastructure put forward by the leading candidate in the U.S. presidential election of 2016, to provide easier access to public universities and colleges to those left behind, as a sure way to create new jobs and address intergenerational mobility. In fact every leading candidate had made the loss of upward mobility their central plank already in 2015, long before Trump and Sanders started their campaign. The real hope lies in western leaders Merkel, May, and Clinton, all keenly aware students of changes, all women by the way who have sensed the injustice and have the ability to come up with something new and promising for the future, after learning the lessons of the past. ...