LyrArc Article Gist
David Albright, a former weapons inspector in Iraq, says 24 days is enough time for Iran to wipe out traces of nuclear work, such as working with explosives to trigger a weapon or construction of a small plant to make centrifuges. A situation actually happened in 2003 when the atomic energy agency wanted to inspect the Kalaye Electric Company site in Iran in 2003, where Iran was using centrifuges received from Pakistan. Iranians removed all traces of illicit work at the time while delaying inspectors. This case was cited by Olli Heinonen, a former deputy director of the agency. Heinonen says smaller scale activity such as manufacturing uranium components for a nuclear weapon can be carried out and the traces deleted in 24 days. Senator Corker points out that the time allowed would be more than 24 days when all the time is added up correctly.

LyrArc Article Gist
David Brooks of the NYT describes the failure of the Iran nuclear deal of July 2015- as having failed to achieve any of the objectives the U.S. set forward over many years under two administrations to limit the development of nuclear weapons. He calls it a defeat for the U.S. similiar to that in Iraq and Vietnam, that did not need to happen.

LyrArc Article Gist
Dana Milbank describes comments by Dick Cheney, former vice president, on the Iran nuclear deal of 2015, and what he sees as the lack of credibility Cheney brings based on his handling of the WMD issue in Iraq.

LyrArc Article Gist
Idea that control over Straits of Hormuz is US goal is repudiated by DJT in his Address to the Nation, yet it finds its way into the media. There is no war for US to win, it is only about removing a nuclear and ballistic missile threat, nothing to do with oil. MAGA base, US public has rejected these wars in remote countries of the Middle East, when reindustrialization is the goal, not repeating the mistakes of Bush and Obama who by fighting these wars for 8 years in Iraq wasted resources and pursued policies that deindustrialized the Nation and weakened the heartland of America. Beyond limiting the threat of nuclear weapons and long range ballistic missiles that could hit US, Europe and other nations there is no other goal. US and DJT repeatedly pointed out that being self sufficient it does not need Iranian or Iraqi or Saudi oil. The president even said in his Address that the US wanted to supply other countries with oil as it produced more than Saudi and Russia combined, and not counting Venezuelan oil production ramp up expected by 3-4 million barrels a day. Behind this is the known fact that China and Japan get 90% of their imports from Hormuz Straits, so it is up to these nations and India and Britain to find solutions to Hormuz not the US. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The world today is in a much better position to complete the transition to zero dependence on the volatile Middle East for oil. Today in 2026 the world's largest nations 1. US   2. China  3. India  4. Germany are all free of Middle East oil (India through waivers for Russian sources). European Union and UK is at about 12% which can be quickly substituted from the US+ Venezuela and other sources. US is self sufficient in oil and gas and exports oil to the UK, India, Germany and the European Union. Canada is self sufficient. Germany gets only 6% of its oil from the Middle East, the UK 12%, Spain 13% and Italy 14%. The Iran war is likely to shift more of the needs of UK, Spain and Italy to other more stable sources including oil from the US and Venezuela managed by the US, and other sources. This means that US policymakers can act in the best interests of all the nations of the world for preventing the spread of nuclear weapons and long range ballistic missiles. Germany is moving rapidly to renewable energy and this could bring its dependence on the Middle East to zero. India will meet its needs from Russia for the time being till it also shifts to oil from US+ Venezuela. India get 55% of its oil from the Middle East or about 2.7 million b/d. Russia was an important source of oil for India till the US trade agreement called for it to shift- a 30 day waiver and extension means India can get this oil from Russia without sanctions for the duration of the war. Reducing European demand and Indian demand frees up oil for Japan and South Korea on the world market the other 2 countries dependent on Middle East oil- Japan importing 95% of its oil consumption with imports of 2.5 million b/d and South Korea importing about 2 million b/d or 70% of its consumption. This means Japan and South Korea need a new strategy as they are overexposed to one source just as Germany was and learned a difficult lesson to diversify its sources. Japan has learned to reduce consumption for the same level of GDP and some of this can be through conservation, also tried in Germany in the last 4 years. During the 4 years. of Ukraine war Germany had to find ways to diversify sources Japan and South Korea will need rapidly to do the same in the Iran War. This means that only Japan and South Korea because of their lack of policy direction and vigilance have allowed this overdependence on the Gulf region,  (even as Germany diversified its sources, DJT and Israel were firm on nuclear weapons policy) they failed to see signs that they should diversify. Today in 2026 the world's largest nations 1. US 2. China 3. India 4. Germany are all free of Middle East oil (Indi through waivers for Russian sources), European Union and UK is at about 12% which can be quickly substituted from the US+ Venezuela and other sources.    ...

LyrArc Article Gist
It might not all make sense that the Pakistan/China mediated ceasefire conditions (including US and Israeli condition of no nuclear weapons development and ballistic missile development) are really not known even in the media today, only known to the Iranian government and the US government. In these conditions Iran's government gets to show that it had achieved its goals, even with enormous reconstruction costs of the damage done during the war. DJT had pointed to a sort of regime change in Iran after most of the earlier leadership has been removed, and new leaders in place who are keen on setting up conditions for their own administration replacing the old one.  Over the period 2027-2030 the prospect is real that China, India and Japan may shift their oil supplies sources to other regions, increase conservation per unit of GDP, and increase supplies of renewable energy, steps already taken by Germany over the last decade. Most media looks only what happens today and in 2026. This may be the last of the Middle East Wars before Europe and the US, and India, China, Japan shift away from the Middle East to get supplies of fossil fuels, and it may bring new renewables technologies that reduce the dependence on fossil fuels to the point of making a true transition to renewable energy. It may also be the last of the Middle East Wars in the sense that people of European nations and the US insist on no involvement in MIddle East as a sort of quagmire for squandering American, European and Asian vital resources of people and capital, ample example being given over the last 40 years. Considering the costs of the war and the moral cost of destroying infrastructure such as power plants that hurt the local population more than the regime in power, China, Japan, the US, and EU, India may find it is easier to race each other in coming up with alternative supplies and shifting to renewable energy faster than planned, making Middle Eastern oil supplies  and volatility in prices redundant, which would be a good thing after the hugely negative and costly experience of the last 50 years of dependence.     ...

LyrArc Article Gist
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee meeting at a large convention center and calls for military action against Iran. Milbank says the situation is reminiscent of Bush's statements about Iraq in 2003 before the invasion- that though Bush insisted that "war is my last choice," war was coming and was being planned. And he points out whatever doubts President Obama and his advisors may have about the effectiveness of a military strike in moving Iran away from nuclear weapons development, the U.S. President may be setting in motion developments leading to war.

LyrArc Article Gist
DW.com shows the Straits of Hormuz where the Persian Gulf meets the Gulf of Oman before it meets the Arabian Sea facing India. Ships cross a narrow space of 2 miles in the narrowest point that is 21 miles wide in the Straits of Hormuz. The UAE, Oman face Iran in that area. 20 million barrels of oil by tanker traffic cross the Straits of Hormuz every day. India, China, Japan and EU depend on the Straits of Hormuz for oil supplies making it critical for sea navigation. Iranian parliament  has threatened closing of the Straits as aresponse to the US strike on nuclear weapons development sites. China and India lose cheaper oil supplies from Iran as a result of the Israel-Iran war. Russia, Saudis, UAE, Qatar, gain because it increases the price of oil supplies from Russia. Iran loses a source of oil revenue with damage to its oil facilities. The Israeli economy is resilient and its stock markets are showing rapid growth as the war changes the Gulf region and  Southwest Asia, South Asia moving it in the direction of economic and business deals and agreements that enhance improvement in the lives of the people away from decades of conflict from the colonial era in which the British and the French gained control of the Gulf region and Iraq, Syria after the collapse of the Ottoman Empire, the anti colonial regimes that failed to provide development, the CIA's intervention under Dulles and Eisenhower to remove the democratically elected government of Mossadegh in Iran in 1953 and its repercussions in the Reagan period with Rumsfeld/Reagan compounding that error by supporting Iraq's Hussein leading to 3 decades of loss of American lives in the region's wars and also endangering Israel. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
A thaw in U.S. relations with Iran in Sept. 2013 as Iran releases some political prisoners. President Rouhani tells NBS News that Iran does not plan to seek nuclear weapons, and that he had the full authority to reach a deal with western nations on the nuclear issue.

LyrArc Article Gist
As Iranian Foreign Minister left Pakistan before arrival of American negotiators showing lack of interest in negotiations on nuclear issue and navigation on which US has insisted, the talks are on pause. The US goal is only for the safety of the Iranian people and the peoples of the Gulf kingdoms, and the Arab world divided into unmanageable countries in some situations by colonial Empires of the British and French in 1921 (Syria, Iraq), the wider Arab world from Egyot to Libya, Tunisia, Algeria and Morocco, to be free of nuclear weapons. Because these colonial policies not of the US but of the British and French and the counter response of Arab nationalism, have created 5 decades of wars in the world. It is then to remove these nuclear materials to another country such as Russia. The misperceptions created in the media appear in some parts to cast the US as a colonial power which it never was in the way of the Spanish, the British, the Dutch, the Portuguese, the French, the Danish. In fact exactly the opposite. One cannot think of an American who felt deeply for the situation the Chinese people were left in with the Japanese invasion than Gen. Joe Stilwell, as shown by Barbara Tuchman in her book Stilwell and the American Experience in China. Stilwell amazingly risked his life in railroad cars behind Imperial Japanese Army enemy lines in north eastern China in the 1930's because of his deep ly feelings for China at that time. Ever since the US differed with the British and the French on reparations during the Boxer rebellion of 1902, with Woodrow Wilson using the funds to create Tsinghua University in Peking (Beijing), the US has been benevolent in its intentions and as shown in its policy to Africa a partner for nations in Asia and Africa- with China, India, Indonesia, a large part of the Asian population, and now with Africa as shown in the investments in Angola, Congo, Zambia on this page. FDR made it clear in his letter of reply to Gandhi's letter from Wardha whose side America is on even in the middle of World War II. ...

LyrArc Article Gist
U.S. president Obama invited NYT's columnist Thomas Friedman to the White House for an interview on Saturday afternoon April 4, 2015. Here Friedman gives president Obama's response to his questions, and Obama's concerns about the heated rhetoric in the U.S. and Israel on the negotiations with Iran detracting and distracting from his key goals of protecting U.S. interests and Israel. On the Sunni states, Saudi Arabia and Egypt, Obama points out that there are some tough conversations needed about changes inside their societies which pose a greater threat to the governments than Iran. Obama says he understands perfectly that Israel and the Jewish people after their experience of the last hundred years are determined to not let Iran develop a nuclear weapon, and their right to be concerned that the agreement could let Iran clandestinely develop one. Obama says the verification is extensive and covers any facility in Iran, any suspicion about secret facilities, yet it leaves the subsequent decisions if Iran created difficulties, to a international body over which the U.S., UK, France, have no control. This is a principal issue for critics of the negotiated agreement. No mention is made of why Iran simply discarded the option of sending the atomic material to Russia to be processed into nuclear rods for the Bushehr nuclear plant built by Russia only a few days before the final outline was developed. And why the U.S., with allies Germany, France, UK and Japan, did not offer the Iranians an economic aid package if needed in return for the billions Iranians invested for that atomic material, to ensure that the atomic materials are shipped out of the country- to create a nuclear agreement that would be credible to all parties. The economic aid would benefit Iran modernize its oil industry, including refining operations, meet basic import needs, and provide tangible proof to the Iranian people of our best intentions for the future, that president Obama strongly espouses in the interview. The interview does show the quandary president Obama faces in Iran for strong action, that is a result of failed policies with Iran since the Eisenhower administration's intervention 1953 during the Cold War that displaced the elected government of Mosaddegh in Iran and setup the Shah's regime in 1956, the support of Saddam Hussein in Iraq in the war against Iran, which Obama mentions in this intervew. In the light of the repeated failures of the U.S. policies a Democratic party leader faces increasing reservations for taking strong action against Iran's development of nuclear weapons capabilities, preferring to exhaust every diplomatic channel, and take risks in the hope that time will give the Iranian people an opportunity to to reintegrate in the global community and pursue the peaceful development of nuclear energy. This strain in president Obama's thinking is evident throughout the interview with Friedman. Other aspects of president Obama's policy in the Middle East shared in the interview are about supporting the Sunni states in some areas, and Iran in some areas, at the same time as the nuclear issue is "put in a box" and separated from the regional conflicts. Friedman presents this as the Obama doctrine, yet it appears to be coming after a series of improvisations in foreign policy following a failure to act in 2011-2013, when the "once in a lifetime" opportunities presented by the Arab Spring were not taken up by the Obama administration, leading to the region's current disintegration....

LyrArc Article Gist
The title is misleading as the US president DJT has said on Air Force One on Tuesday -"I don't care what she (Tulsi Gabbard) said, I think they were very close to having them." Most administration officials including the head of Central Command see the risks growing by the week. Here is what Gen. Erik Kurilla told the Senate Armed Services Committee last week- Iran is merely "steps away" from uranium enriched to weapons grade level of 90%. He said if Iran decided to build a nuclear weapon it could have the first 55 pounds of weapons-grade material “in roughly one week and enough for up to 10 nuclear weapons in three weeks.” 

LyrArc Article Gist
The European Union governments are finding it increasingly difficult to salvage the Iran nuclear deal and lifting of sanctions. European governments rejected Iran's 60 day ultimatum to help circumvent U.S. Trump administration sanctions. The U.S. sanctions have already led to Iran's oil export to drop from 2.5 million barrels a day to 1 million. Lost shipments have cost Iran $10 billion hurting its economy. Initially European nations France and Germany hoped to keep the 2015 Iran nuclear deal by working with Iran, but this has become increasingly difficult with the Trump administration increasing sanctions including limiting access to U.S. markets for nations that do not cooperate with U.S. policy. The U.S. pulled out of the Iran nuclear deal and now it looks like the Europeans are faced with a difficult choice in continuing to work with Iran.

LyrArc Article Gist
This WSJ editorial raises serious concerns about the outlines of the nuclear deal with Iran- the AP Protocol does not provide for any time, any place inspections of nuclear facilities, could Iran evade inspections by developing a new facility such as it did with the Fordo complex underground after 2006. After all it reminds readers that Iran signed nuclear protocol agreements in 2003, but failed to observe them, and set them aside altogether after 2006. And Iran is not like reaching an agreement with Costa Rica or Netherlands, says WSJ, it could look good on paper, but with monitoring weak and the Iranian intentions not clear, a lot can go wrong. One of the principal concerns says the WSJ, is the nuclear weapons technologies spreading in the Middle East to other countries as Iran gets a weapon, leading to a disastrous war a decade from now. It says this is why president Obama's response to criticism that its this or war is not enough. A lot of the details says WSJ, have still to be worked out....

LyrArc Article Gist
Bolton warns that the policy of negotiating with Iran has failed. He points to the dangers of nuclear proliferation in the Middle East, with Saudi Arabia's intention to acquire a nuclear weapon in the rivalry between Shiite Iran and the Sunni led coalition led by the Saudis.

LyrArc Article Gist
Countries like Bangladesh, Pakistan, Sri Lanka and Nepal are severely affected by the war in Persian Gulf region in other ways that access to oil and fertilizer supplies. They are affected when the Gulf economy collapses and expatriate workers are laid off or return. The situation is dire in these countties because as the DW.com says remittances exceed exports in the case of Pakistan. Is such a model viable asks DW.com. All these countries are also affected by internal strife, with new governments in place in Bangladesh, Nepal and Sri Lanka after protests over economic conditions and jobs. The entire Middle East model for Gulf countries including Saudi, Iran are also facing a new situation as the Western countries, US and EU and Asia shift to nuclear energy, solar energy and find ways to conserve at an accelerated pace so that there will be less dependence on fossil fuels. Recently India announced on its national television channel that one third of peak demand is already being met by solar energy. India's PM Modi says in rallies across the country that he would make it possible for households to have zero electric bills because of solar panels on homes. Germany and Japan are further along on this path to create a renewable energy reliance and phasing out fossil fuels. ...

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
Rockets fired by Iran close to the U.S. aircraft carrier U.S.S. Truman in December 2015 could lead to a shift in sentiment in the U.S. following the nuclear deal with Iran in 2015 by the Obama administration. Ballistic missile testing was one of the issues in the negotiations leading up to the nuclear deal with serious differences between Congress and the Obama adminsitration on the issue. Recent ballistic missile tests by Iran may reinforce differences on this issue.

LyrArc Article Gist
This report in WSJ has an interview of Walter Mead with Israeli pm Netanyahu on Iran nuclear deal and  its development of nuclear weapons, ways of reaching peace with Arab nations that could end the Palestinian Israeli conflict.

LyrArc Article Gist
This Journal editorial raises the issue of the need for full public disclosure of any and all side deals with the Iran nuclear deal of July 2014. It points out that Rep. Mike Pompeo of Kansas of the House Intelligence Committee, and Senator Tom Cotton of Arkansas came to know of side deals only when they were disclosed to them by the Deputy Director of the IAEA at a meeting in Vienna. This has assumed a different proportion of significance because of many unknowns in the agreement, particularly the one involving the military site at Parchin, which inspectors have not had access for 10 years and where Iran is reported to be conducting research on tests for anuclear weapon.

LyrArc Article Gist
Over 50% of Israelis support Iran war, only 30% oppose. As Israelis see it Iran under religious clerics is the only real threat to Israel in 2025 because of Iran's policy of proxies for attacking Israel in Lebanon and in Gaza, and because of it's development of nuclear weapons and openly threatening Israel. The US involvement in Iranian politics dates from the Dulles and Eisenhower era with the CIA's involvement in the overthrow of the democratically elected Iranian prime minister Mossadegh in 1953. Working with British intelligence and for British oil interests, US oil interests, the US made a serious mistake as seen from today's perspective. The moral is British or French colonial policy stay from it America- George Washington himself would advise. Israel is paying the price and is asked to correct what was done by the British in Iran since 1850's- to bring back a peaceful democracy with the kind of struggles even Greece experienced. The unelected wholly unrepresentative government of the Shah who was put in the place of a democratically elected government was a serious mistake. The British and French colonialism and oil interests of Britain plus American oil companies have led to US getting on the wrong side of the Vietnamese people in the war in Vietnam against the French that ended at the battle of Dien Bien Phu in 1954. It had repercussions in the Vietnam war under Kennedy and Johnson. This has happened in the case of Iran where the US has gained so little and lost so much in lives and resources sunk in the ensuing was in Syria, Iraq, Kuwait, Afghanistan, Yemen. The European Union suffered from the huge migrant flow from Syria with splits in its ranks. The distractions of these 30 years through Reagan and Rumsfeld who supported Hussein in Iraq against Iran in a balancing act is now foolishness, of elder Bush as he diverted attention to a long desert war in Kuwait, of Bush and then Obama in Afghanistan, who wasted enormous resources and impoverished the American people. Leaving legacy wars for Trump and Biden to handle. After Vietnam another failed chapter of Iran in the US for the American people by incompetent leaders who were taken in by French and British colonial and oil interests in wrong directions.   ...

LyrArc Article Gist
What is California's position in nuclear and renewables and does the substance the facts justify the image it promotes of being energy friendly and using renewables? Answer is NO  because only 9% of its total end use energy consumption according to EIA figures (2023) comes from renewables. It uses no coal yet about 60% of its energy is from crude oil. During the current crisis in the war with Iran is California an example to follow? The answer is No because it has not used renewable energy the way Germany has or EU has, and it has not managed its crude oil well by not using domestic crude oil instead relying on imports, which only burden the global needs for crude oil coming from a state with capacity to do lot better. By comparison Germany gets 23% of its total energy consumption from renewables compared to 9% for California, and for Germany 60% of its total electricity production is from renewables compared to 46% for California. EIA data shown here from US government data does not paint a very energy friendly picture. California's imports of crude oil at 75% of consumption and drop in refineries from 48 to 3 shows it has not managed the oil refining side of energy in the best way possible. How does it rate in making good use of energy? Here it uses 174 million BTU's per capita no different than New York at 174 and about the same as Florida and Washington DC, Massachusetts, Maryland.  And Germany has achieved 122 million BTU per capita showing California far behind. How does it rate in using renewables and nuclear? As it is a state with urban and suburban sprawl with large driving distances it uses a lot of crude oil for transportation. Petroleum or crude oil use is 58% of total energy use, Natural gas 25, Renewables are only 3%, electricity generation is 14% of which only 46% is from renewables. California is NOT the model for the US. We have to look elsewhere for answers.   ...