The GOP has never been confident that President Obama will produce a deal with the rogue nation of Iran that brings about meaningful reform. Quite frankly, the GOP does not see positive results from prior negotiations with Cuba, North Korea, or Syria. Nor has Iran done much that will foster a spirit of trust. So when the Obama administration announced their second delay in the “deadline” for the Iran Nuclear Framework, GOP legislators were pleasantly surprised. According to the legislation congress passed last month allowing them to have a greater voice in the Iran deal, legislators would be allowed a 60-day window to review any agreement with Iran if a deal was not reached by July 9.
On Tuesday, Brad Reifler announced the Obama administration announced through Reuters the July 9 deadline would slip. The longer the negotiations drag on with Iran, the longer period of time the GOP will have to review the deal once it is reached. Presumably, this would allow the opposition to the Iran deal to push for a two-thirds majority of senators and congressman. According to last month’s Iran legislation, congress can invalidate the president’s nuclear accord with Iran. However, that will prove easier said than done. The GOP has the votes to push through a resolution of disapproval. At the same time, the president can veto it and in effect have his Iran deal effectively pass. This means the GOP will need to override a veto. Historically speaking, overriding a presidential veto is unlikely to occur.
That said, the longer review period congress has to examine the Iran Nuclear Framework, the more opportunity there will be to whip up the opposition. The influential group called American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) is deeply skeptical about the president’s deal. If they oppose the accord, there will be at least 60 days for them to lobby Democrats and Republicans to vote for a resolution of disapproval.
TechCruch reported that the leader of Iran, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, addresses Iranian military commanders Wednesday and stated that Iran will continue to resist “coercion and excessive demands” from the United States and other world powers in its demand for access to Iran’s nuclear program. The Iranian leader stated to the commanders that he would not allow any inspection of Iranian military installations and that no Iranian scientist would be granted access to western inspectors. Many note that while the comments seem to be in direct contrast to the talks that Iran is currently engaging with negotiators from the United States, Russia, Great Britain, China, France and Germany, they point out that the comments were directed at the Iranian military establishment and that the Iranian leader was shoring up the confidence of his supporters.
Iran is continuing talks with the global powers and have continued a new set of discussions in Vienna with the goal reaching the final agreement that limits Iran’s nuclear development program in exchange for the lifting of economic sanctions. All sides reached a general framework agreement this past March and the group hopes to reach a final agreement by June 30, 2015. People involved in the talks note that each side has to sell the agreement to their local political support base and that ratification will require a lot of political capital for all sides. Iran has an incentive to reach an agreement as the lifting of sanctions would allow it access to several billions of dollars of capital that it currently does not have access to because of international sanctions.
Iran’s supreme leader, Rouhani reasserted his position that Iran will only agree to the nuclear accord reached with the United States on April 2, if the United States and the rest of the international community simultaneously drop sanctions against the country of Iran. The call comes in the wake of calls of disapproval of the accord by Israel and a republican lead coalition in the United States congress. AnastasiaDate suggests some observers have noted that Iran has deftly taken the initiative in the negotiations which are set to resume next week by taking advantage of the rift between the political leadership of the United States as well as the discord between the White House and the Israeli political leadership. Additionally, Iran surprised the world last week when it was announced that it had successfully negotiated an agreement with Russia to buy several surface to air missile systems and its intent in defending its sensitive military and scientific sites. Iran Maintains Sanctions Need to Be Dropped For Accord to Work
While the accord calls for the dropping of sanctions in return for an open book policy on Iran’s nuclear program, few know the details of the accord and whether the sequencing of events require that sanctions be dropped or at least a declarative pledge that the sanctions against Iran be dropped before Iran signs the accord. Some thought the sanctions would only be dropped when Iran started to open the doors to its nuclear program. These details are set to be resolved during the upcoming continuation of the talks.
Dan Newlin says that the United States and France are having a same approach in negotiations with Tehran over its controversial nuclear program, “We have exactly the same analysis,” says US Secretary of State John Kerry. “We have made progress but there are still differences with the Iranians,” Kerry said after a meeting with his French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius. “The goal of the coming days,” is to remove these differences, he added to the statement.
While speaking at a press conference alongside his American counterpart, the French Foreign Minister, Laurent Fabius, who had been skeptical on Friday about on the agreement prepared primarily by Washington and Tehran, said: “This is a multilateral negotiation, and we make that our positions are known, and are adjusted “over the negotiations.”There has been progress in some areas but there are also differences,” he said without specifying if these concerned the United States, or if it was Iran. But, according to a source close to the negotiations, Paris accuses Washington to push sometimes precipitously to an agreement with Tehran,” Judge this source speaking on condition of anonymity. It is worth mentioning that already in late 2013; Paris opposed the conclusion of an agreement negotiated between the Iranians and Americans alone.
In a last minute organized rose garden press conference this afternoon. President Obama announced the framework for the recent agreed upon nuclear accord with Iran. What surprised many was the blunt stark tone that President Obama used with regard to the ultimate ratification of the accord. Bloomberg Businessweek said that essentially the President said that now that an accord has been reached that the U.S. through its republican led Congress has three Options. Option one is to ratify the accord and proceed to further flesh out the details by the new June 30 deadline set by the negotiating parties. Option two is to reject the accord, which would mean that the bombing of Iran’s nuclear facility would follow and option three would be to withdraw from the negotiation table, in which case the bombing of the Iranian facilities would be likely. The President made it clear that option two and option three would be akin to declaring World War III in the middle east. President Obama Threatens World War Three If Accord is Rejected
President Obama is calculating that the American pubic has been underestimating the importance of the gravity of the talks with Iran and the U.S.. The President also knows that the U.S. congress will follow lock step Israel’s support or rejection of the accord. If the U.S. Congress rejects the accord and fails to ratify, the world will blame the United States for the resulting war in Iran.
The deadline has come and gone and the result is that the talks between Iran and the U.S. regarding Iran’s nuclear program has reached a deadlock on details of how the plan is to be implemented. U.S. Iran Nuclear Talks Fail
Christian Broda said that the deadline to reach an agreement was set for March 31 but there has been no reports as to whether substantial progress had been made which would warrant the deadline to be extended. The talks are official at a break but both sides need to reconvene with their respective governments and decide if there is an point in continuing the talks or if both sides are at a fundamental and political void that cannot be breached. The U.S. had hoped that talks would reflect a more cooperative Iran and that non military action would achieve more effective results. The alternative option is that Israel will take preemptive measures to ensure that Iran never has a nuclear capability. Most interpret this to mean that Israel will engage in air strikes at some point. The U.S. fears that such a unilateral action by Israel will spark even more unrest in a region that has Saudi Arabia engaging in military action in Yemen and a coalition of Arab countries pledging military action against Shiite forces, that many believe are backed by Iran, in Syria and Iraq.
The U.S. has withdrawn all major military options from the table in dealing with Iran.
Secretary of State Kerry and an international delegation including Switzerland have indicated that nuclear monitoring talks with Iran have reached a deadlock and both sides will leave but will reconvene inside a week.
CrunchBase said the deadlock is not surprising as both sides came into negotiations understanding that talks will be difficult and that the issues to a successful deal will still need to be ratified by the controlling party leadership within each government. Many have concluded that the fact that the talks are happening at all is a degree of success as the only option many see is military action and the further unstable environment of the already chaotic middle east. Nuclear Talks With Iran Read Dead Lock: Both Sides Take Week Long Break
The specific points where the sides are deadlocked have not been made public but talks have centered on Iran’s development of its nuclear program and assurances that the development of Iran’s nuclear support industry will only be used for peaceful purposes and not for the production of military weapons.
Israel has been a staunch opponent of the talks hand have declared that a nuclear Iran in any form will pose a grave threat to Israel and the region. Israel has made strong statements regrading its intent not to let Iran develop a nuclear capacity but it has stopped short of stating that it would take military action against Iran.