Reuters: Iran, world powers reach initial deal on reining in Tehran's nuclear program

[visionary]

http://www.reuters.com/article/2015/04/02/us-iran-nuclear-idUSKBN0MQ0HH20150402

Iran, world powers reach initial deal on reining in Tehran's nuclear program

 

Iran and world powers reached a framework agreement on Thursday on curbing Iran's nuclear program for at least a decade, a step toward a comprehensive accord that could end 12 years of brinkmanship, threats and confrontation.

 

The tentative agreement, after eight days of marathon talks in Switzerland, clears the way for talks on the future settlement that should allay Western fears that Iran was seeking to build an atomic bomb and in return lift economic sanctions on the Islamic Republic.

 

The framework is contingent on reaching an agreement by June 30 and all sanctions on Iran remain in place until a final deal is reached.

 

Many details still need to be worked out and diplomats close to the negotiations said the deal was fragile. It could not be ruled out that the understandings reached could collapse between now and June 30. Experts believe it will be much harder to reach a final deal that it was to agree the framework accord.

 

Odd, I was just dreaming about a deal being done earlier today.  (For some reason I was arguing with the Iranian FM too, but that's another story, lol)

[Renegade7]

I'm tired of war, and I know i'm not the only one.

[Boss_Hogg]

@peterbakernyt: Obama invites Arab leaders, who are leery of Iran deal, to Camp David this spring to talk about security.

[Larry]

Crosses fingers. 

[Predicto]

*also crosses fingers*  I don't trust the Iranians at all, but presumably this deal is designed so that blind trust is not a component.

 

Frankly, there was no other option than a deal like this.   We weren't going to invade them, as much as Netanyahu wanted us to.  And absent such an invasion, they were going to get the bomb in the next couple of years just like Pakistan and India and North Korea and Israel already did.   They are a competent, educated and technologically advanced country with the necessary resources and (unfortunately) the will to build a bomb.       

[Larry]

Yep.  Far as I can see, the options are: 

 

1)  Inspectors.

 

2)  A nuclear Iran. 

 

(Frankly, I'm rather surprised that they don't have one, yet.  It almost makes me wonder if maybe we crippled them more than I know, and Iran's plan is to get the sanctions lifted, so they can rebuild for a couple of years, then kick the inspectors out, again.) 

 

Yeah, it would have been better if we could have worked out a deal where they have no enrichment capability, at all.  But I don't see us getting that concession. 

[Predicto]

Yep.  Far as I can see, the options are: 

 

1)  Inspectors.

 

2)  A nuclear Iran. 

 

(Frankly, I'm rather surprised that they don't have one, yet.  It almost makes me wonder if maybe we crippled them more than I know, and Iran's plan is to get the sanctions lifted, so they can rebuild for a couple of years, then kick the inspectors out, again.) 

 

Yeah, it would have been better if we could have worked out a deal where they have no enrichment capability, at all.  But I don't see us getting that concession. 

 

 

There was no way for us to get that concession.  We didn't have that kind of leverage, and the Iranians could not have accepted that without losing too much "face."  They aspire to be the leaders of the Muslim world.   The deal would have collapsed.

 

and yes, it is possible that this is all a trick by Iran.  But even if that is the case, it doesn't change anything.   Even if we had crippled almost all their centrifuges, they would have gotten the bomb anyway, just a year or two later.  

 

Unfortunately, it's not that hard to build the bomb if you have the resources, and they do.      

[zoony]

Well I think this is a refreshing change of policy

[Voice_of_Reason]

Countries involved in the talks and their stance:

Russia: I don't care what you do, just buy it from us!

China: I don't care what you do, just buy it from us!

France : (stays silent, wonders why they are still considered s world power.)

UK: we defer to the Americans. (Also kindof wonders why they are a world power)

Germany: Iran shouldn't have the bomb. But if they do, we're probably not the first target.

U.S.: damn it.

[twa]

Did we hit another Reset button?

 

 

[Burgold]

Did we hit another Reset button?

Well, better than hitting that other button.... the one in the brief case.

[twa]

Well, better than hitting that other button.... the one in the brief case.

 

That was a option?

 

Revote

[tshile]

It shows sanctions work, done correctly they are powerful.

 

Larry and Predicto - I ask you because you seem to know more about this than me... you're not concerned this agreement creates a situation where we cannot get the sanctions back, therefore have lost all leverage? iran just has to wait until the agreement is over and then they're free to do whatever they want?

 

maybe too hard to answer that without seeing the actual details, which aren't even agreed to apparently.

[visionary]

http://www.vox.com/2015/4/2/8337347/iran-deal-good?utm_campaign=max_fisher&utm_content=chorus&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter

This is an astonishingly good Iran deal

 

When Aaron Stein was studying nuclear non-proliferation at Middlebury University's Monterey graduate program, the students would sometimes construct what they thought would be the best possible nuclear inspection and monitoring regimes.

 

Years later, Stein is now a Middle East and nuclear proliferation expert with the Royal United Services Institute. And he says that the Iran nuclear framework agreement, announced on Thursday, look an awful lot like those ideal hypotheticals he'd put together in grad school.

 

"When I was doing my non-proliferation training at Monterey, this is the type of inspection regime that we would dream up in our heads," he said. "We would hope that this would be the way to actually verify all enrichment programs, but thought that would never be feasible."

 

"If these are the parameters by which the [final agreement] will be signed, then this is an excellent deal," Stein concluded.

 

The framework nuclear deal establishes only the very basics; negotiators will continue to meet to try to turn them into a complete, detailed agreement by the end of June. Still, the terms in the framework, unveiled to the world after a series of late- and all-night sessions, are remarkably detailed, and almost astoundingly favorable to the United States.

 

Like many observers, I doubted in recent months that Iran and world powers would ever reach this stage; the setbacks and delays had simply been too many. Now, here we are, and the terms are far better than expected. There are a number of details left to be worked out, including one very big unresolved issue that could potentially sink everything. This is not over. But if this framework does indeed become a full nuclear deal in July, it would be a huge success and a great deal.

 

http://www.slate.com/blogs/the_slatest/2015/04/02/iran_nuclear_deal_today_s_announcement_was_more_substantive_than_expected.html?wpsrc=fol_tw

The Iran Deal Is a Lot More Substantive Than Expected

 

We have a nuclear deal! Or rather, an “agreement on [the] framework for [a] final agreement.” Or “parameters to resolve major issues.” Or perhaps “the outlines of an understanding that would open the path to a final phase of nuclear negotiations.”

 

Whatever you want to call it, the “plan of action” read aloud today by EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini and Iranian Foreign Minister Javad Zarif was a lot more comprehensive than expected after eight days of fraught talks. As recently as Wednesday, the negotiations in Lausanne, Switzerland, appeared to be on the verge of collapse, with foreign ministers fleeing the scene. After marathon final negotiating sessions Wednesday night and Thursday, the general assumption was that the “agreement” would amount to only a vaguely face-saving “official press situation,” as Zarif put it earlier Thursday, that would kick the can down the road until the next round of talks this summer.

 

But the deal announced Thursday afternoon actually contains some specifics. According to a fact sheet released by the State Department, Iran will reduce its installed centrifuges by two-thirds, to about 6,000, and won’t enrich uranium over 3.67 percent for the next 15 years. (“Weapons grade” uranium is more than 90 percent enriched.) Iran will enrich uranium only at its facility at Natanz, with its heavily fortified Fordow reactor converted to a nuclear research center. Inspectors from the International Atomic Energy Agency will have access to all of Iran’s nuclear facilities. And Iran will substantially reduce its stockpile of enriched uranium, though it’s not quite clear if it will be diluted or shipped abroad.

 

http://foreignpolicy.com/2015/04/02/a-skeptics-guide-to-the-iran-nuclear-deal-2/?utm_content=bufferca754&utm_medium=social&utm_source=twitter.com&utm_campaign=buffer

A Skeptic’s Guide to the Iran Nuclear Deal

 

Ok, I admit it. I thought this framework was going to suck. Actually, it’s not bad.

 

My main concern all along was that the P5+1 countries (technically the E3/EU+3; congratulations if you know the difference) were too focused on “breakout time” — imposing arbitrary limits on Iran’s centrifuge program to ensure that if Iran used its known nuclear infrastructure, it would take at least a year to build a bomb. The bigger worry about Iran’s nuke program, I always thought, was unknown nuclear infrastructure, such as any hidden centrifuge sites.

 

To my surprise, the deal — at least as it is described in the fact sheet released by the White House — manages to impose measures to guard against breakout, while also providing for a number of measures that help substantially with the problem of covert facilities. All in all, it’s a pretty comprehensive framework for managing the problem. It’s certainly worth lifting some sanctions, though a crucial detail is how quickly that will happen and whether sanctions can be reimposed if things go pear-shaped.

 

But there are still reasons to be cautious. First, all we have at the moment area White House-released fact sheet and a couple of ambiguous news conferences in Lausanne, Switzerland, and the White House Rose Garden. (Javad Zarif, Iran’s foreign minister and lead negotiator, is already complaining about the White House’s fact sheet.) There is, after all, a reason one writes these things down. The parties will need a few more months to work out the details of the actual agreement in order to implement the “framework” that was announced Thursday, April 2. Those negotiations will be crucial because the kind of language in the statements and fact sheet — which probably seem pretty detailed to a casual observer — doesn’t provide the sort of clarity that a final agreement will need in order to work. (Ask me about long-range missiles of any kind sometime.)

 

Second, getting a deal on paper is only the first step. The parties have agreed to do all sorts of things. This may shock you, but sometimes parties have trouble delivering on such promises. Agreements aren’t self-implementing, so a major test will be how the parties deal with the inevitable challenges that human beings pose to implementing even a beautifully written final agreement. That’s not a reason to reject agreements, just a caution about being realistic.

 

Finally, please keep in mind that this deal makes it marginally less likely that Iran will build a nuclear weapon. That’s great. But it doesn’t solve the problem of Iran’s missile program or Tehran’s less-than-stabilizing role in the Middle East.

 

 

On the other hand:

 

 

https://twitter.com/columlynch

U.S. parameters suggests Iran needs to meet conditions on nuclear front before UN sanctions lifted. The joint statement has no conditions.
9:25 PM

[Stadium-Armory]

[@DCGoldPants]

The louder a Scott Walker or Jennifer Rubin are against this, the better I feel about it. If we can get an ex-Bush guy to be bigtime against it. Then you know its pretty good for the allies who worked on the deal. 

[Predicto]

It shows sanctions work, done correctly they are powerful.

 

Larry and Predicto - I ask you because you seem to know more about this than me... you're not concerned this agreement creates a situation where we cannot get the sanctions back, therefore have lost all leverage? iran just has to wait until the agreement is over and then they're free to do whatever they want?

 

maybe too hard to answer that without seeing the actual details, which aren't even agreed to apparently.

 

 

I don't know.  But we couldn't have held the sanctions together forever if no agreement was reached.  Eventually it would have been just us, the way it is in Cuba, and it would have been just as worthless.   And Iran would have a bomb.   So you have to get the best deal you can, while you can, and do it in such a way that Iran will go along.   Or else you have nothing.  

[tshile]

I don't know.  But we couldn't have held the sanctions together forever if no agreement was reached.  Eventually it would have been just us, the way it is in Cuba, and it would have been just as worthless.   And Iran would have a bomb.   So you have to get the best deal you can, while you can, and do it in such a way that Iran will go along.   Or else you have nothing.  

 

Fair enough.

 

The crappy thing... and I get this from people I know that have been to Iran or have family in Iran, as well as a few tv shows/documentaries that went to iran and spoke to the people (Anthony Bordain has a good episode where he went to Iran)... it seems like the iranian people have no problem with us.

 

It's the iranian government and our government that can't get along and have created this mess. And in some ways, our people, because we just believe whatever our media tell us for the most part.

[Larry]

Well, granted, when it comes to Iran (or most anything else), I'm not just in the cheap seats, I'm not even in the same zip code as the stadium. 

 

But I get the impression that the Iranian people actually elected somebody who's at least a lot more moderate, towards the US. 

 

(Was that because the sanctions were hurting?  I dunno.) 

 

To me, this agreement (assuming it holds together) has the potential of not only keeping Iran from getting the Bomb.  It might have the effect of strengthening the political position of a moderate Iranian, in his own country. 

 

(But then, I'm an optimist.  About most things.) 

[No Excuses]

Rouhani is no where close to being the two-faced borderline lunatic that Ahmadinejad was. A nuclear deal, based on the framework that we are learning about now would have been impossible with him as President. 

 

I can't remember if it was 2008 or 2012, when during debates, several Republican candidates were fairly vocal about going to war with Iran. That would have been a disaster and a regional destabilization nightmare that would make Iraq/ISIS look like a Disney movie.

[Kilmer17]

Bravo to Obama and his team.

[Bang]

Fingers crossed again. I hope for real progress.

 

~Bang

[grhqofb5]

Well, since no one really knows what this proposed deal contains (it sounds like even the parties don't), I'll say this:

 

If the "deal" includes any component that requires Iran to comply with a critical restriction, and there is no right for inspectors to confirm compliance with that critical restriction, and Iran's violation of that restriction would provide it with the opportunity to create a nuclear weapon, its a bad deal.

[Larry]

deleted post. 

[tomwvr]

what I see here is another Peace for our Times event that Neville Chamberlain signed with Hittler in 1938. I just hope this dose not lead to another big war. 

 

The Saudis, Egypt, Qatar and several other Gulf States are now discussing getting Nukes, my guess is they will purchase them from Pakistan.

 

This is NOT a good thing,

 

When you have these nations all agreeing with Israel it tells you that the USA is doing the WRONG thing.....