Talks With Iran End Without Nuclear Deal = 'Win' For Iran

Why is this development a 'win' for Iran? Because while negotiations continue without resolution, Iran continues to develop their nuclear weapons. In fact, prolonged 'negotiations' may represent the best-case scenario for Iran. 

Talks Between Iran And West End Without Nuclear Deal

Talks in Geneva between world powers and Iran ended early Sunday morning without a deal on Iran’s rogue nuclear program, after hitting a snag on Saturday when France questioned the terms of a proposed agreement. The sides agreed to meet again in Geneva on November 20, but at the level of “political directors” rather than foreign ministers.

France’s Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said the talks had managed to narrow differences without eliminating them and that there were still questions to be dealt with in future rounds.

“From the start, France wanted an agreement to the important question of Iran’s nuclear program,” he said,according to Sky News. “The Geneva meeting allowed us to advance, but we were not able to conclude because there are still some questions to be addressed.”

EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton also said a lot of progress had been made. At a joint press conference with Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, Ashton said, “We’re not going into the details of our discussions but I pay tribute to all the ministers, including Laurent Fabius’s attempt to try and help support this process.”

Ashton appeared more disappointed than Zarif that the marathon negotiations had failed to yield an agreement. A relaxed and smiling Zarif, indeed, said it was “natural that when we start dealing with the details there would be differences of views, and we expected that.”

He said he was “not disappointed at all” that a final deal had proved elusive, and asked directly whether he attributed the failure to France, chose not to assign blame. He said he had been hoping to find “the political will to end this” nuclear standoff, and said, “I think we’re all on the same wavelength.” This would give the sides the “impetus” to move forward next time — “something to build on,” he said. If there weren’t differences, he added, smiling again, the sides would not have needed to meet.

France Stalls Deal On Iran Nuclear Program

No result has been reached during the latest round of talks between Iran and six world powers. A widely predicted breakthrough was apparently blocked by doubts from the French delegation over Iran’s true intentions.

"From the start, France wanted an agreement to the important question of Iran's nuclear program,” French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told reporters after the meeting. ”The Geneva meeting allowed us to advance, but we were not able to conclude because there are still some questions to be addressed." 

The sides have managed to agree on a basis for further negotiations, Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said.

"A foundation for joint work has been created to define the parameters of the Iranian nuclear issue settlement based on meeting the phased approach and reciprocity requirements," Lavrov said.

On Sunday, Iranian Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ali Khamenei took to Twitter to criticize France for scuttling talks, warning Paris was being needlessly hostile towards Iran. 

“French officials have been openly hostile towards the Iranian nation over the past few years; this is an imprudent and inept move,” he tweeted, mirroring a speech delivered on March 21. Khamenei further wrote France would be rise not to turn a neutral power into an "enemy." 

Just How Bad Is The Geneva Nuclear Deal for Israel?

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has been denouncing the emerging — but not finalized — agreement between six Western powers and Iran over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program as a “very dangerous and bad deal for peace and the international community.”

But is it really as atrocious as Netanyahu believes?

The exact terms of the proposed interim deal are still unclear, but it would likely entail a freeze of Iran’s nuclear progress in return for limited sanctions relief. Whatever the final terms, it appears certain that Netanyahu’s maximalist demands will not be met. 

The crux of Israel’s vehement rejection of the deal is the uranium enrichment capacity Iran is left with; while Israel sees it a zero-sum game, the so-called P5+1 powers seem more flexible.

Nobody who seriously cares about Israel’s security is ecstatic about the proposed deal. But while for some it is utterly unacceptable, others reason that, in the absence of better alternatives, it’s worth pursuing. Kerry’s key point at his press conference was that the interim deal would freeze the Iranian program; in its absence, the Islamic Republic is still moving relentlessly toward the bomb.

But Netanyahu isn’t the only one broadcasting dismay, and he may attempt to build a potent alliance of opponents.

“Given the Iranian history of obfuscation regarding its nuclear program, I am deeply concerned by reports that the administration is prepared to cut a deal providing sanctions relief for minimal, and reversible, Iranian concessions without requiring a full and complete halt to its nuclear efforts,” Speaker of the US House of Representatives John Boehner saidFriday. “The administration does not have a good answer to the concerns raised that this potential deal will allow Iran to continue to enrich and to build new centrifuges, while buying time to develop a breakout nuclear capability.”

Iran expert and Foundation for Defense of Democracies director Mark Dubowitz lamented that the proposed arrangement would allow Iran to keep in place its complete nuclear infrastructure and “maintain a still dangerous uranium breakout capacity” that would allow the regime to weaponize uranium whenever it pleased. “It does nothing to address centrifuge manufacturing, which is the key element to Iran’s secret enrichment program,” he told Bloomberg.

The Devil Is In The Nuclear Details

Also see:

Philippine Super Typhoon Kills At Least 10,000

Philippine Typhoon Deaths Climb Into Thousands

U.S. Removing Navy From Mid-East As Russia Enters

The American aircraft carrier USS Nimitz was recalled from the Persian Gulf on Friday, along with the destroyer USS Graveley from the Mediterranean Sea. The move comes less than a week after Russia sent its most powerful warships to the Mediterranean.
Al Jazeera reports the Nimitz moved through the Suez Canal into the Red Sea, and is anticipated to reach the US in late December. It was scheduled to return in August but was left in the region for a military presence.
The US ships were assigned to the region months ago as US President Barack Obama considered a military strike on Syrian President Bashar Assad's regime. On Friday the US Defense Department announced their removal, signalling the Obama administration's total 

abandonment of a Syrian military option.

The move further signals a weakening of US military presence in the Middle East, precisely as Russia stands to heighten its influence.

Following cooling American relations with both Egypt and Saudi Arabia, Russian President Vladimir Putin is set to visit Egypt later this month, which many see as an attempt to replace America's role as military provider to the country. America partially froze military aid to Egypt after former President Mohammed Morsi was deposed.

Putin is expected to announce an arms deal during his visit, which coincides with earlier reports of a 15 billion dollar arms deal in the works for Egypt, partially funded by Saudi Arabia.

US Navy presence in the Middle East was increased following the chemical weapon strike on Damascus August 21. After deliberating a military reaction, Obama announced on August 31 that he would ask for approval first from Congress, where the move met opposition.
Still in the region for America are the USS Harry S Truman aircraft carrier in the North Arabian Sea, along with two destroyers and a cruiser in the eastern Mediterranean, according to Al Jazeera.