WarSclerotic

The new Iran: all change or just more of the same? – Alarabiya.net English | Front Page.

Video footage captured by Syrian rebels suggests that Iran’s involvement in the Syrian conflict goes beyond sending advisors to assist Bashar al-Assad’s regime. The BBC reported on 30th October that the video shows the extent of Tehran’s assistance to the National Defense Force (NDF), a pro-Assad militia.

The new Iranian president, Hassan Rowhani, presents himself to the West as a moderate; elected largely because he promised change and relief from the effects of international sanctions which have crippled the country’s economy. The video shows that Iran’s policy toward Syria, however, remains unchanged. And Syria is only part of a larger story. Iran is engaged in a broader turf war in the Middle East and beyond—increasingly in Africa and Latin America. A new President but it’s the same old story: Rowhani has little power and even less incentive to change this course.

Diplomacy cannot succeed so long as the Iranian regime is driven by an ideology that, at its core, is in an existential conflict with liberal democratic values.

Anna Borshchevskaya

Western policymakers refer to Iran as a “regional power.” Yet Iranian politicians themselves increasingly refer to the Islamic Republic as a “pan-regional power” instead, implying a broader area of influence. Iranian officials continue to use media, aid and/or irregular forces to influence Bahrain, Lebanon, Iraq, and Afghanistan. Tehran has also reached out to many African countries, particularly those that vote in important international organisations, such as the U.N. Security Council, uranium-producing countries, and littoral states that can provide logistical support for the Iranian navy. Iranian officials have described Iran as an “extra-regional power,” – an even greater, though subtle, emphasis on Tehran’s ambitions outside the Middle East and beyond building a nuclear bomb.

According to former FBI counter terrorism analyst Matthew Levitt, Hezbollah, a terrorist group founded and trained by Iran and still working in conjunction with the Islamic Republic, is currently investing in countries such as Nigeria, Sierra Leone, Gambia, Senegal and Cote d’Ivoire, to solidify its presence in the region. Levitt’s assessment additionally confirms that Tehran’s connection to Latin America is also growing and that Hezbollah’s role in drug trafficking is well documented. According to the U.S. Department of Justice in 2011, Tehran attempted to recruit a Mexican drug cartel to assassinate Adel al-Jubeir, the Saudi Ambassador to the United States. Iran and Venezuela for years have had a strategic alliance against Western “imperialism.” Roger Noriega, former U.S. Assistant Secretary of State for Western Hemisphere Affairs, has warned U.S. lawmakers and journalists in March 2013 that Iranian influence is only growing in Venezuela and that Iran’s proxy, Hezbollah, carries out terrorist attacks in the country, helping Tehran gain access to Venezuela’s financial sector and so circumvent Western sanctions.

A moderate course?

Some Western policymakers may believe that the current Iranian leadership is more moderate than the previous one. Yet in September 2013, the regime’s press mocked President Obama’s address to the United Nations General Assembly where he praised Rowhani’s “… moderate course,” and expressed commitment to the “… diplomatic path” with Iran.

Washington DC-based Iran scholar, Ali Alfoneh, wrote that, in response to Obama’s diplomatic outreach, “… Rowhani was not attempting to find common ground with Americans but that he, rather, aimed to please developing nations, rising powers and hardliners at home in Tehran.”

Iran continues to execute criminals and this has only increased in 2013. The regime executed some 20 inmates the weekend of 26th October. According to Amnesty International, state executions have increased sharply in 2013 in Iran—hardly the actions of a reform-minded government. Senior Iranian cleric Ahmad Khatami recently warned Iranians that Western diplomatic engagement was a trap because if the nuclear issue is resolved, the U.S. “… will raise the issue of human rights … and say whatsoever rights men have, women should have them too.”

The U.S. Congress is currently discussing a bill that calls for a review of the impact of U.S. policies towards Iran. Amidst warnings from Olli Heinonen, former International Atomic Energy Agency Deputy Director General, that Iran could be as close as two weeks away from acquiring enough highly-enriched uranium for a nuclear bomb, the bill could delay a new round of sanctions by as much as four months.

The White House asked Congress to give Western countries a chance to reach a diplomatic solution with the Iranian regime before imposing new sanctions. Diplomacy, however, cannot succeed so long as the Iranian regime is driven by an ideology that, at its core, is in an existential conflict with liberal democratic values.

__________
Anna Borshchevskaya is a fellow at the European Foundation for Democracy, specialises in the politics of the Middle East, Russia and Eastern Europe. Until June 2013, she was assistant director of the Atlantic Council’s Patriciu Eurasia Center. In 2011, she served as a qualitative research analyst for Glevum Associates, a U.S. military contractor, conducting public opinion research in Afghanistan. She also has worked as a research analyst for the Peterson Institute for International Economics and at the Swiss Foundation for World Affairs and the International Organisation for Migration. She has published articles on Russia and the Middle East in publications such as Washington Post.com, Forbes.com, Nationalreview.com and, FoxNew.com, CNN, and the Middle East Quarterly. She also provides regular analysis for the Foreign Military Studies Office at Fort Leavenworth’s Operational Environment Watch. She is fluent in Russian and speaks Arabic and Spanish. Twitter: @annaborsh

US has ‘folded’ on Iran, Israeli political sources charge | JPost | Israel News.

By YAAKOV LAPPIN

11/09/2013 22:42

Sources: Israel learned over the weekend of deal on the table in Geneva that is far worse than one previously presented to J’lem.

Geneva with Iran over its nuclear project, political sources in Israel charged on Saturday. They added that Israel was stunned when it learned over the weekend that a version of the deal being proposed was far worse than it believed.

Senior political sources said that the deal that has been sitting on the negotiations table since the weekend is “very bad.” It calls on Iran to stop enriching uranium to the 20 percent level, but allows them to continue enriching uranium to 3.5% at all of its enrichment sites. In addition it fails to place a limitation on the number of centrifuges in Tehran’s possession, estimated to number 19,000.

Under the proposed deal, “Iran won’t really be paying a significant price,” a source added.

“To our understanding, they’re receiving a significant easing of sanctions,” he added.

Rewards to Iran include the unfreezing of $3 billion of fuel funds, an easing of sanctions on the petrochemical and gold sectors, an easing of sanctions on replacement parts for planes and a loosening of restrictions on the Iranian car industry.

If such a deal goes ahead, “We might head down a lane that will lead to a collapse of the sanctions regime. This is very grave,” the source continued. “This won’t really stop the [nuclear] project. It will give the Iranians breathing space.”

Israel’s position is that as long as Iran continues, sanctions must not be lifted, and should even be tightened.

If Iran freezes its nuclear program, holding off on new sanctions would be acceptable from an Israeli perspective, but easing them would be a major error.

Israel received updates on the talks from the US on Wednesday, as well as from others, and believed that the deal taking shape would be limited to unfreezing $3b. of Iranian assets in Western bank accounts. Even at that stage, Israel objected to the plan, due to its assessment that the moment a crack in the door appears, and sanctions are eased, the door can then be torn down by international companies from countries such as China, Italy and Germany who are thirsty for business with Iran.

Once major international transactions begin, a dynamic will kick in that will lead to a collapse of sanctions, according to this evaluation.

But over the weekend, Israel learned that the deal on the table is far worse than the one presented to it on Wednesday, and included four clauses for the easing of sanctions rather than just one. Israeli officials said they became furious when the details of the actual deal reached them, describing it as an “enormous mistake.”

“[US Secretary of State John] Kerry left with food for thought after a tough conversation with [Prime Minister Binyamin] Netanyahu,” the political source said.

At the same time, he stressed, the US did not deceive Israel. Instead, the Americans “folded” between Wednesday and the weekend, “maybe because they very much want to reach an agreement and be done with this,” he added.

“The Iranians are the ones who came crawling to the negotiations, begging for an easing of sanctions, otherwise their regime will fall, and what’s incredible is that it seems that the Americans are more eager than them to reach an agreement,” the source charged.

If the deal is signed, the momentum against Iran could fall apart, he warned.

Israeli officials believe that Iran isn’t far from the point where it will have to decide to give up on the nuclear project in favor of economic survival, and are incredulous that at the moment of truth, a poor deal is being floated.

The source paid tribute to France for its firm stance against the agreement, adding that Britain is following the soft line being pushed by the US.

The delays in reaching an agreement between the P5+1 countries and Iran in the Geneva talks could well be due to Israel’s deep dissatisfaction, officials said, as well as France’s objections.

“At the moment it seems like every side is trying to improve its stance,” the source said.

The international community must know how to engage in tough diplomacy with Iran if it wishes to avoid seeing military force used against the Islamic Republic, Defense Minister Moshe Ya’alon cautioned on Saturday.

He added that an agreement between Iran and the international community over Tehran’s nuclear program under the proposed terms would be a “historic mistake.”

“Specifically now, when the Iranian regime is in great economic distress and is anxious about its survival, Western countries must not blink and strike a bad deal, which will grant Iran breathing space and ease the sanctions on the one hand, and won’t cause it to make real concessions on the nuclear project on the other,” Ya’alon said.

“It’s important for those who want to prevent a need to use force against Iran to know how to manage tough diplomacy, to bring the Iranian regime to a junction in which it’ll have to choose between its survival or a continuation of the nuclear project,” he added.

He called on the international community “not to be blinded” by the Iranian charm offensive.

“An agreement now, under current conditions, is a historic mistake that will allow the warmongering regime in Tehran to continue with its dangerous nuclear program, and its ambition to spread terrorism and undermine regimes across the Middle East, and the whole world,” the defense minister warned.

Opposition leader Shelly Yacimovich (Labor) said the talks in Geneva raise concern.

“Now it seems that the basis of the interim agreement is not dismantlement of Iran’s ability to develop a bomb, but just a freeze, and that is not enough, because in the meantime sanctions are lessened and Iran can breathe easily and restart armament at any time,” Yacimovich said at a cultural event in the southern Sharon region on Saturday.

The Labor leader called it “worrying” that the talks in Iran come “at the height of a crisis in our relations with the Americans.”

“[Netanyahu] must remember that our friendship with the US is our most important strategic asset,” she added. “We must accelerate peace talks, and a wave of construction in the territories is the opposite of that. As long as the peace process is stuck and the US is distancing itself from us, we lose influence on the Iranian issue.”

On the other side of the political spectrum, Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon said that “the emerging agreement between Iran and the world powers is emptying sanctions of any content.”

“Iran immediately gets less sanctions in exchange for false promises to delay its nuclear program,” he said.

Lahav Harkov contributed to this report.

Israel to lobby against any deal that would leave Iran with enrichment capabilities | JPost | Israel News.

By HERB KEINON, REUTERS

11/10/2013 03:54

Under proposed deal Iran could build nuclear bomb in weeks, Israeli official warns.

Israel will campaign unrelentingly against a deal with Iran that allows it to retain uranium enrichment rights and does not end its development of a plutonium track toward nuclear arms, a senior Israeli official said on Saturday night.

The official’s comments came as world powers and Iran failed to finalize an agreement – one that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu characterized as a “very, very bad deal” for Israel and the world – giving Israel time to fervently make its case against the deal before the next round of talks on November 20.

“Some important people inside the P5+1 share our perspective and are anxious about the direction this is going,” the official said.

The P5+1 negotiation with Iran includes the US, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany.

Talks between Iran and six world powers on curbing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions ended without an agreement early Sunday morning as a split emerged between France and the other powers, diplomats said.

Israeli officials have been saying for months that France has been towing the toughest line against Iran’s nuclear program inside the P5+1, more so than the Americans.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said it was not clear the delegations would succeed in nailing down an acceptable interim deal that would begin to defuse fears of a stealthy Iranian advance towards nuclear arms capability.

“As I speak to you, I cannot say there is any certainty that we can conclude,” Fabius told France Inter radio, saying Paris could not accept a “sucker’s deal.”

Fabius said the security concerns of Israel and some Arab neighbors of Iran still “have to be taken into account.”

Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz may have had the French remarks in mind when he said on Saturday that he “draws encouragement from the fact that there are other partners to Israel’s concerns about the agreement shaping up.”

While French opposition to the proposed deal showed an interesting alignment of views with Israel on this matter, the last three days revealed deep fissures between Israel and the US on the best way to deal with Iran, with Netanyahu telling US Secretary of State John Kerry during a tense meeting on Friday not to rush off and sign a deal, but rather to reconsider.

The latest round of talks began on Thursday and details of what was being discussed led to Netanyahu issuing a number of unprecedentedly sharp statements against the proposed deal.

“I reminded him of his own words, that it is better not to reach a deal then to reach a bad deal,” Netanyahu said after his Friday meeting with Kerry. “The proposal being discussed now is a bad deal, a very bad deal. Iran is not asked to dismantle even one centrifuge, but the international community is easing sanctions on Iran for the first time in many years.”

According to Netanyahu Iran was getting everything it wanted at this stage and not giving anything in return, and this at a time when Tehran was under intense pressure.

Just before meeting Kerry on Friday, Netanyahu said that he understood that the Iranians were “walking around very satisfied in Geneva, as well they should be, because they got everything, and paid nothing.

“They wanted relief from sanctions after years of a grueling sanctions regime. They got that. They are paying nothing because they are not reducing in any way their nuclear enrichment capability,” he said.

Following these statements, US President Barack Obama called Netanyahu on Friday afternoon to discuss the talks, following what the White House had called Netanyahu’s “premature” criticism.

“The president provided the prime minister with an update on negotiations in Geneva and underscored his strong commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which is the aim of the ongoing negotiations between the P5+1 and Iran,” the White House said in a statement.

Nevertheless, on Saturday – after the conversation with Obama – a senior Israeli official said that “the more the details accumulate” regarding the Geneva talks, “the greater the puzzlement at the haste to sign an agreement that is so bad for the world.”

The official said that the proposed deal would leave a military nuclear capability in Iran’s hands that would enable it to “break out” and build a nuclear bomb within a matter of weeks.

The official said that Israel completely rejects the Geneva proposal that does not shut down all Iranian uranium enrichment, a move demanded even by previous UN Security Council resolutions, and would not be obligated by it.

The official said Israel supported a diplomatic solution that would bring an end to Iran’s nuclear weapons program, meaning it must dismantle its centrifuges, transfer out of the country its enriched uranium, and stop all work on its heavy water reactor at Arak.

“There is no reason to give the right to enrich uranium to a country that blatantly violates Security Council resolutions, participates in the slaughter of civilians in Syria, and carries out a campaign of terrorism around the world,” the official said.

Israel’s sharp criticism of the deal could make it more difficult for Obama to sell any eventual deal to US lawmakers, who have been far from compliant regarding White House proposals on Syria and numerous domestic issues.

US lawmakers have threatened to slap new sanctions on Iran even as the talks are taking place, despite White House appeals to hold off while negotiations continue.

Eric Cantor, majority leader in the Republican-controlled House, said a Geneva deal would fall short if it did not entirely halt Iran’s nuclear program.

While an agreement was not finalized on Saturday, Kerry said on Sunday that world powers had come closer during negotiations with Iran in Geneva to a deal on reining in its nuclear program and that “with good work” the goal could be reached.

“We came to Geneva to narrow the differences and I can tell you without any exaggeration we not only narrowed the differences and clarified those that remain, but we made significant progress in working through the approaches to this question of how one reins in a program and guarantees its peaceful nature,” Kerry said.

The secretary of state also cautioned against “jumping to conclusions or believing premature reports or prejudging outcomes.”

In a sign that the cordiality that reigned in the first round of talks last month and earlier this week was dissipating, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araqchi told Mehr news agency that his counterparts from the six powers “need constant coordination and consultation in order to determine [their] stances.”

The main sticking points appeared to include calls for a shutdown of a reactor that could eventually help to produce weapons-grade nuclear fuel, the fate of Iran’s stockpile of higher-enriched uranium, and the nature and sequencing of relief from economic sanctions sought by Tehran.

The powers remain concerned that Iran is continuing to amass enriched uranium not for nuclear power stations, as Tehran says, but as fuel for nuclear warheads.

They are searching for a preliminary agreement that would restrain Iran’s nuclear program and make it more transparent for UN anti-proliferation inspectors. In exchange, Tehran would obtain phased, initially limited, relief from the sanctions throttling the economy of the giant OPEC state.

Iran spelled out one major bone of contention. A member of its negotiating team, Majid Takt-Ravanchi, told Mehr news agency on Friday that Western powers should consider easing oil and banking sanctions during the first phase of any deal.

The powers have offered Iran access to Iranian funds frozen abroad for many years but ruled out any broad dilution of the overall sanctions regime in the early stages of an agreement.

Israeli officials said that any sanctions relief without Iran dismantling its nuclear weapons capabilities was like a “small hole in a tire.”

Even a small hole makes the tire go flat, one official said. He added that there were countries in Europe, eastern Europe and Asia who were very keen on doing business with Iran, and who were just waiting for a signal that the sanctions regime is weakening to make their move back into the Iranian market.

Michael Wilner contributed to this report from Washington.

Iran and West fail to reach deal as Geneva nuclear talks conclude | JPost | Israel News.

By REUTERS

LAST UPDATED: 11/10/2013 02:04

Talks to continue on Nov. 20, as split emerges in Western camp.

GENEVA – Iran and six world powers failed in marathon talks to clinch a deal to curb Tehran’s nuclear program but said differences had narrowed and they would resume negotiations in 10 days in a fresh bid to end the decade-old standoff.

But clear divisions emerged among the US and European allies on the final day of the talks as France hinted that the proposal under discussion did not sufficiently neutralize the threat of an Iranian nuclear bomb. Iran is hoping for a deal that would ease the international sanctions that have frozen its assets around the world and prevented it from selling its oil.

It is ultimately the Americans and Iranians, who have not had formal diplomatic ties for more than three decades, who have the power to make or break an agreement.

But on Saturday the attention suddenly turned to the French after Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius told France Inter radio that Paris could not accept a “fool’s game” – in other words, a weak deal with Iran.

“From the start, France wanted an agreement to the important question of Iran’s nuclear program,” Fabius told reporters after the meeting, which ran into the early hours of Sunday.

“The Geneva meeting allowed us to advance but we were not able to conclude because there are still some questions to be addressed,” Fabius said.

Fabius’ pointed remarks rankled others in the Western camp. One diplomat close to the negotiations said the French were trying to upstage the other powers and were causing unnecessary trouble for participants in the talks, which are aimed at securing a deal with Iran that has eluded the West for a decade.

“The Americans, the EU and the Iranians have been working intensively together for months on this proposal and this is nothing more than an attempt by Fabius to insert himself into relevance late in the negotiations,” the diplomat told Reuters, speaking on condition of anonymity.

KERRY SEES UNITY

Kerry played down suggestions of a rift, saying, “I think tonight there is a unity in our position and a unity in the purpose as we leave here.”

European Union foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton said senior political officials from Iran and the five permanent UN Security Council members plus Germany would meet again on Nov. 20 to work on a deal.

Kerry told reporters that an agreement could be within reach.

“There is no question in my mind that we are closer now as we leave Geneva than we were when we came and that with good work and good faith over the course of the next weeks, we can, in fact, secure our goal,” Kerry said.

“We came to Geneva to narrow the differences and I can tell you without any exaggeration we … narrowed the differences and clarified those that remain,” he said.

But he warned Tehran that Washington’s desire for a diplomatic solution to the long-running dispute over Iran’s nuclear program was not infinite, saying the window for diplomacy “does not stay open indefinitely.”

Ministers from Iran and the major powers held a series of meetings late on Saturday in a final push for an outline of a deal that would freeze parts of Iran’s atomic program in exchange for sanctions relief. In the end, however, they chose to adjourn for 10 days.

Ashton and Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif said they hoped an agreement would be signed later this month.

“We have done some intense negotiations and discussions and our objective is to reach a conclusion and that’s what we will come back to try and do,” Ashton told reporters.

Zarif said: “We had a very good three days, very productive three days, and it is something we can build on.”

The latest talks began on Thursday and Kerry unexpectedly arrived on Friday to help bridge differences and secure an agreement. From the time he arrived in Geneva, Kerry played down expectations of a deal.

Fabius, British Foreign Secretary William Hague and their counterparts from Russia and Germany, Sergei Lavrov and Guido Westerwelle, also attended, along with Chinese Vice Foreign Minister Li Baodong, demonstrating the six-nation group’s commitment to reaching an agreement.

“DIFFERENCES OF VIEWS”

Zarif, asked about the role Fabius played in the talks, did not criticize the French minister, saying disagreements at this stage of the negotiations were to be expected.

“It was natural that when we start dealing with the details there will be differences of views and we expect it,” he said. “I am not disappointed at all because the meeting we just had … was a good meeting.

“I think we are all on the same wavelength and that is important and that gives us the impetus to move forward when we meet again next time.”

The main sticking points in the talks include calls for a shutdown of an Iranian reactor that could eventually help to produce weapons-grade plutonium, the fate of Iran’s stockpile of higher-enriched uranium and the nature and sequencing of relief from economic sanctions sought by Tehran.

The powers remain concerned that Iran is continuing to amass enriched uranium not for future nuclear power stations, as Tehran says, but as potential fuel for nuclear warheads.

They are searching for a preliminary agreement that would restrain Iran’s nuclear program and make it more transparent for UN anti-proliferation inspectors. In exchange, Tehran would obtain phased and initially limited relief from the sanctions throttling the economy of the giant OPEC state.

Iran and the six powers have been discussing a partial nuclear suspension deal lasting about six months. During that time, Iran and the six powers would negotiate a permanent agreement aimed at removing all concerns that Tehran is amassing the capability to produce nuclear weapons.

One concession under consideration is the disbursement to Iran, in installments, about $50 billion of Iranian funds blocked in foreign accounts for years.

Another step could be temporarily relaxing restrictions on precious metals trade and Washington suspending pressure on countries not to buy Iranian oil.

Negotiators have limited political room to maneuver as there is hard-line resistance to any rapprochement both in Tehran – especially among its elite Revolutionary Guards and conservative Shi’ite clerics – and in the US Congress.

Kerry appeared to respond to his critics in the US legislature by saying, “This is an issue of such consequence that really needs to rise or fall on merits, not on politics.”

ISRAELI OBJECTIONS

Kerry arrived in Geneva on Friday from Israel after a tense meeting with Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, who rejected any budding compromise with Iran.

Netanyahu warned Kerry and his European counterparts that Iran would be getting “the deal of the century” if they carried out proposals to grant it temporary respite from sanctions.

Israel, which is believed to have the Middle East’s only nuclear arsenal and regards its arch-enemy Iran as a mortal threat, has repeatedly mooted military action against Tehran if it does not mothball its entire nuclear program.

Iran dismisses such demands, citing a sovereign right to a nuclear energy industry, and most diplomats concede that, as Tehran has expanded its nuclear capacity exponentially since 2006, the time for demanding a total shutdown has passed.

Kerry seemed to acknowledge on Sunday divisions among US allies who worry that a deal with Iran would be a mistake – an apparent reference to both Israel and Saudi Arabia.

“We also understand there are also very strong feelings about the consequences and choices we face for our allies and we respect that,” Kerry said. “Some of them are absolutely directly and immediately involved and we have an enormous respect, needless to say, for those concerns.”

Like Israel, Saudi Arabia has expressed concerns to Washington about the nuclear ambitions of Iran, the Saudis’ main rival in the region, as well as Tehran’s support for Syrian President Bashar Assad in Syria’s 2-1/2-year civil war.

Rouhani: Right to nuclear enrichment is Iran’s ‘red line’ | JPost | Israel News.

By REUTERS, JPOST.COM STAFF

11/10/2013 09:11

Following failure to reach an interim nuclear deal in Geneva, Iranian president tells National Assembly that Tehran “won’t bow its head to threats,” and “won’t answer to any sanction, humiliation or discrimination.”

Iran’s president Hassan Rouhani said on Sunday that its “rights to enrichment” of uranium were “red lines” that would not be crossed and that the Islamic Republic had acted rationally and tactfully during nuclear negotiations, Iranian media reported.

“For us there are red lines that cannot be crossed. National interests are our red lines that include our rights under the framework of international regulations and [uranium] enrichment in Iran,” he said during a speech at the National Assembly, Iran’s student news agency (ISNA) said.

“We have said to the negotiating sides that we will not answer to any threat, sanction, humiliation or discrimination. The Islamic Republic has not and will not bow its head to threats from any authority,” he added, calling sanctions “an illegal and ineffective solution.”

“For Iran, the main road to resolve issues and reaching an international political solution is dialogue, dialogue and dialogue,” the Iranian president continued. “The success of negotiations mean peace and stability to the region and the world.”

On Saturday, Iran and six world powers failed in talks to clinch a deal to curb Tehran’s nuclear program but said differences had narrowed and they would resume negotiations in 10 days to try to end the decade-old standoff.

Rouhani, who was elected in June, is the chief architect of Iran’s diplomatic drive for a nuclear deal to alleviate harsh economic sanctions on its oil and banking industries.

His negotiating team is pushing to agree a framework for steps to resolve US suspicions that Tehran wants nuclear weapons capability.

The Islamic Republic says its activities are purely peaceful and negotiators say they are ready to take the steps necessary for such an agreement if their nuclear “rights are recognize” and world powers reciprocate by easing sanctions.

▶ BBC News Progress in Iran nuclear talks in Geneva, says John Kerry – YouTube.

–

–

Talks With Iran Fail to Produce a Nuclear Agreement – NYTimes.com.

Martial Trezzini/Keystone, via Associated Press

“The Geneva meeting allowed us to advance, but we were not able to conclude because there are still some questions to be addressed,” the French foreign minister, Laurent Fabius, said.

By MARK LANDLER and MICHAEL R. GORDON

Published: November 9, 2013 121 Comments

Lessons on hypocrisy from Syria | JPost | Israel News.

By DAVID M. WEINBERG

11/10/2013 06:14

All the human rights moralizers are ignoring the frightening plight of Palestinians and Christians in the Syrian civil war. There is, alas, no anti-Israel angle to the story.

The fighting in Syria once again proves the sad old adage that human rights organizations and their advocates in the mainstream Western media are essentially anti-Israel. There is no other way to explain the fact that all these high-and-mighty moralizers are ignoring the frightening plight of Palestinians and Christians in the Syrian civil war.

You see, there is no anti-Israel angle to the story of Palestinian or Christian suffering in Syria. That suffering can’t really be blamed on the Jews. So nobody cares.

The United Nations Relief and Works Agency for Palestine Refugees in the Near East reports that approximately 250,000 Palestinians have been displaced inside Syria since the beginning of the conflict two years ago. In May, for example, some 6,000 Palestinians were expelled from their homes in Ein al-Tal, a refugee camp near Aleppo in northern Syria.

The response from the world: Nothing.

Silence.

In addition, more than 55,000 Palestinians have been forced to flee Syria to Lebanon and Jordan over the past two years. In Lebanon, the Palestinian refugees join more than 500,000 other Palestinians who live in refugee camps and are subject to apartheid laws that deny them work, social and health benefits, and freedom of movement.

But of course, there has been no international uproar about this.

Now imagine if six (never mind 60, 600, or 6,000) squatting Palestinian families were forced to move two kilometers out of an IDF firing zone in the southern Hebron hills.

There would be UN investigations, international tribunals, condemnations from Western capitals, and much handwringing and moralizing by Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and more.

Actually, this has happened exactly. A grand total of 10 Palestinian families were forced out by an IDF evacuation order. And the world went berserk.

It gets much worse. At least 2,000 Palestinians have been killed in Syria, by both the rebels and the Syrian army.

But of course, you wouldn’t know about this from the Western press.

Now imagine if IDF troops killed 150 terrorists, and inadvertently also killed a few civilians behind which the terrorists were hiding, during a raid meant to destroy enemy missile launchers. There would be UN investigations, international tribunals, condemnations from Western capitals, and much handwringing and moralizing by Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and more.

Actually, this has happened exactly.

The two Palestinian governments – Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and Fatah-led Palestinian Authority in the West Bank – have said or done nothing to draw global attention to the plight of their brethren in Syria. Neither the Palestinians nor Arab countries nor Arab League foreign ministers have asked for an emergency UN Security Council session to discuss the new Palestinian tragedy. They are more worried about construction of a few homes in Israeli settlements in the West Bank than the lives of thousands of Palestinians in Syria.

IT IS NOT ONLY Palestinians suffering from Arab and Western disinterest. It is also Syria’s Christians, more than 600,000 of whom have been displaced or fled Syria since the rebellion began, according to Patriarch Gregorios III Laham, spiritual leader of the Melkite Greek Catholic Church. It seems that their fate will be similar to that of the Christians in Iraq, half of whom emigrated, fled or were killed.

In March 2012, Islamist militants went door to door in neighborhoods of Homs, expelling local Christians. Of the more than 80,000 Christians who lived in Homs prior to the uprising, approximately 400 remain today. In May 2012, Christian residents of Qusayr received an ominous warning: Either join the opposition against Bashar Assad or leave.

Soon after, thousands of Christians fled the town.

Christians who have fled to Egypt or Jordan tell of harassment, fictitious marriage proposals designed to traffic their daughters, and curses and beatings for being Christians.

In September, the rebel Al-Nusra Front (an affiliate of Al-Qaeda) took control for several weeks of the ancient Christian town of Maaloula, northeast of Damascus, and desecrated all the churches. A grisly video has been posted online of the public beheading of a Syrian priest and two youths by Al-Nusra fighters.

Similar attacks on churches have been documented over the past month in Raqqa, Sadad and Tel Abyadh. The most recent video out of Syria shows Islamist Sheikh Omar Raghba smashing a statue of the Virgin Mary in Yakubiya, as he declares that “Allah alone will be worshipped in the Levant.” But of course, you wouldn’t know about this from the Western press or Western leaders.

The Vatican News Agency Fides and Catholic Online magazine reported this week that 45 Christians were recently massacred and thrown into mass graves by Islamists in Sadad, a town of 15,000 mostly Syriac Orthodox Christians located 160 km north of Damascus.

The 4,000-year old Assyrian town’s 14 churches and monastery were defiled and looted. According to Archbishop Selwanos Boutros Alnemeh, Syriac Orthodox Metropolitan of Homs and Hama, about 2,500 families have fled from Sadad. “What happened in Sadad,” he says, “is the largest massacre of Christians in Syria and the second in the Middle East, after the one in the Church of Our Lady of Salvation in Iraq, in October 2010, when 58 were killed… We have shouted aid to the world but no one has listened to us.

Where is the Christian conscience? Where is human consciousness? Where are my brothers?” But of course, you wouldn’t know about this from the mainstream Western press or from Western leaders.

Now imagine that a few Jewish hooligans were to vandalize a monastery or two in Israel.

There would be howls of protest worldwide.

The attack would be covered extensively in just about every newspaper in the world, with a lot of buzz about the supposed brutalization of Israeli society and a radicalization of religious Jewry. There would be UN investigations, condemnations from Western capitals, and much handwringing and moralizing by Amnesty, Human Rights Watch and more.

Actually, this has happened exactly.

In short, the world is quick to jump on the rare cases of shameful Jewish hooliganism against Christians in Israel, or measured Israeli actions against Palestinians, but gives short shrift to the rampant and deadly persecution of Christians and Palestinians in the Arab and Islamic world.

When persecution against Palestinians and Christians doesn’t come from the Jews, nobody cares. And this tells me that international howls of protest against Israel related don’t stem from real concern for Palestinian or Christian “victims” of Israel’s heavy hand.

Might it be possible that they stem from ancient hatreds of a different kind?

France’s last-minute hold-out aborts Iran nuclear deal in Geneva.

( Allons enfants de la patrie,  le jour de gloire est arrivé… !  – JW )

Winners and losers in Geneva

Iran and the Six Powers reconvene on Nov. 20 for another attempt to push through a joint draft of their first interim nuclear accord. It was French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius who broke the news that after three tense days, the Iran nuclear talks in Geneva had finished “without a deal,” although intense bargaining past midnight Saturday, Nov. 9 brought an accord closer than ever before.
Fabius amazed his American and European colleagues and Iran when he stuck to its guns to the last, insisting that Iran’s Arak heavy water plant must not come online and that Tehran dispose of its 20-percent enriched uranium stock. Foreign Minister Javad Zarif refused to accept this. No one believed Fabius would go so far as to scupper the conference.
Iran’s Foreign Minister Javad Zarif said: “It is natural. They are six countries with different perspectives, and probably different interests, and they need to reach a conclusion. If the other side is ready to reach a solution, we are also ready, and we have made good progress on this path.”

The intense pressure the US beamed at Israel will now be trained on Paris.
debkafile: While Binyamin Netanyahu’s forceful objections undoubtedly contributed to the Elysee Palace’s stand,  it was President Francois Holland’s decision to draw a resentful line against the partnership between Presidents Barack Obama and Vladimir Putin for dictating the fate of the Middle East between them, and even monkey with the region’s oil markets and economies by lifting key sanctions. France felt it was being pushed to the sidelines by this partnership and decided to align itself with Saudi Arabia and the Gulf Arabs to put a spanner in the works of Washington’s deal with Tehran.

The Geneva conference reconvenes in ten days, but meanwhile President Obama will be licking his wounds from a stinging setback. Iran’s three top men, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei, President Hassan Rouhani and Foreign Minister Zarif, will need to talk fast at home to explain how long months of secret dialogue with the Americans ended in a public humiliation.

In his statement to reporters, Secretary of State John Kerry said that a great deal of progress had been achieved in Geneva and warned people not jump to conclusions. “Diplomacy takes time,” he explained, adding that he fully understood the concerns of America’s allies about the draft agreement. Kerry confirmed that the Arak heavy water plant was one of the items at issue.

Israel to lobby against any deal that would leave Iran with enrichment capabilities | JPost | Israel News.

By HERB KEINON, REUTERS

11/10/2013 03:54

World powers and Iran fail to reach agreement, giving Israel time to fervently make case against deal before next round of talks on Nov. 20; under proposed deal Iran could build nuclear bomb in weeks, Israeli official warns.

Netanyahu and Kerry meet in Rome, October 23, 2013 Photo: Avi Ohayon, GPO

Israel will campaign unrelentingly against a deal with Iran that allows it to retain uranium enrichment rights and does not end its development of a plutonium track toward nuclear arms, a senior Israeli official said on Saturday night.

The official’s comments came as world powers and Iran failed to finalize an agreement – one that Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu characterized as a “very, very bad deal” for Israel and the world – giving Israel time to fervently make its case against the deal before the next round of talks on November 20.

“Some important people inside the P5+1 share our perspective and are anxious about the direction this is going,” the official said.

The P5+1 negotiation with Iran includes the US, Russia, China, France, Britain and Germany.

Talks between Iran and six world powers on curbing Tehran’s nuclear ambitions ended without an agreement early Sunday morning as a split emerged between France and the other powers, diplomats said.

Israeli officials have been saying for months that France has been towing the toughest line against Iran’s nuclear program inside the P5+1, more so than the Americans.

French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius said it was not clear the delegations would succeed in nailing down an acceptable interim deal that would begin to defuse fears of a stealthy Iranian advance towards nuclear arms capability.

“As I speak to you, I cannot say there is any certainty that we can conclude,” Fabius told France Inter radio, saying Paris could not accept a “sucker’s deal.”

Fabius said the security concerns of Israel and some Arab neighbors of Iran still “have to be taken into account.”

Intelligence Minister Yuval Steinitz may have had the French remarks in mind when he said on Saturday that he “draws encouragement from the fact that there are other partners to Israel’s concerns about the agreement shaping up.”

While French opposition to the proposed deal showed an interesting alignment of views with Israel on this matter, the last three days revealed deep fissures between Israel and the US on the best way to deal with Iran, with Netanyahu telling US Secretary of State John Kerry during a tense meeting on Friday not to rush off and sign a deal, but rather to reconsider.

The latest round of talks began on Thursday and details of what was being discussed led to Netanyahu issuing a number of unprecedentedly sharp statements against the proposed deal.

“I reminded him of his own words, that it is better not to reach a deal then to reach a bad deal,” Netanyahu said after his Friday meeting with Kerry. “The proposal being discussed now is a bad deal, a very bad deal.

Iran is not asked to dismantle even one centrifuge, but the international community is easing sanctions on Iran for the first time in many years.”

According to Netanyahu Iran was getting everything it wanted at this stage and not giving anything in return, and this at a time when Tehran was under intense pressure.

Just before meeting Kerry on Friday, Netanyahu said that he understood that the Iranians were “walking around very satisfied in Geneva, as well they should be, because they got everything, and paid nothing.

“They wanted relief from sanctions after years of a grueling sanctions regime. They got that. They are paying nothing because they are not reducing in any way their nuclear enrichment capability,” he said.

Following these statements, US President Barack Obama called Netanyahu on Friday afternoon to discuss the talks, following what the White House had called Netanyahu’s “premature” criticism.

“The president provided the prime minister with an update on negotiations in Geneva and underscored his strong commitment to preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, which is the aim of the ongoing negotiations between the P5+1 and Iran,” the White House said in a statement.

Nevertheless, on Saturday – after the conversation with Obama – a senior Israeli official said that “the more the details accumulate” regarding the Geneva talks, “the greater the puzzlement at the haste to sign an agreement that is so bad for the world.”

The official said that the proposed deal would leave a military nuclear capability in Iran’s hands that would enable it to “break out” and build a nuclear bomb within a matter of weeks.

The official said that Israel completely rejects the Geneva proposal that does not shut down all Iranian uranium enrichment, a move demanded even by previous UN Security Council resolutions, and would not be obligated by it.

The official said Israel supported a diplomatic solution that would bring an end to Iran’s nuclear weapons program, meaning it must dismantle its centrifuges, transfer out of the country its enriched uranium, and stop all work on its heavy water reactor at Arak.

“There is no reason to give the right to enrich uranium to a country that blatantly violates Security Council resolutions, participates in the slaughter of civilians in Syria, and carries out a campaign of terrorism around the world,” the official said.

Israel’s sharp criticism of the deal could make it more difficult for Obama to sell any eventual deal to US lawmakers, who have been far from compliant regarding White House proposals on Syria and numerous domestic issues.

US lawmakers have threatened to slap new sanctions on Iran even as the talks are taking place, despite White House appeals to hold off while negotiations continue.

Eric Cantor, majority leader in the Republican-controlled House, said a Geneva deal would fall short if it did not entirely halt Iran’s nuclear program.

While an agreement was not finalized on Saturday, Kerry said on Sunday that world powers had come closer during negotiations with Iran in Geneva to a deal on reining in its nuclear program and that “with good work” the goal could be reached.

“We came to Geneva to narrow the differences and I can tell you without any exaggeration we not only narrowed the differences and clarified those that remain, but we made significant progress in working through the approaches to this question of how one reins in a program and guarantees its peaceful nature,” Kerry said.

In a sign that the cordiality that reigned in the first round of talks last month and earlier this week was dissipating, Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Seyyed Abbas Araqchi told Mehr news agency that his counterparts from the six powers “need constant coordination and consultation in order to determine [their] stances.”

The main sticking points appeared to include calls for a shutdown of a reactor that could eventually help to produce weapons-grade nuclear fuel, the fate of Iran’s stockpile of higherenriched uranium, and the nature and sequencing of relief from economic sanctions sought by Tehran.

The powers remain concerned that Iran is continuing to amass enriched uranium not for nuclear power stations, as Tehran says, but as fuel for nuclear warheads.

They are searching for a preliminary agreement that would restrain Iran’s nuclear program and make it more transparent for UN anti-proliferation inspectors. In exchange, Tehran would obtain phased, initially limited, relief from the sanctions throttling the economy of the giant OPEC state.

Iran spelled out one major bone of contention. A member of its negotiating team, Majid Takt-Ravanchi, told Mehr news agency on Friday that Western powers should consider easing oil and banking sanctions during the first phase of any deal.

The powers have offered Iran access to Iranian funds frozen abroad for many years but ruled out any broad dilution of the overall sanctions regime in the early stages of an agreement.

Israeli officials said that any sanctions relief without Iran dismantling its nuclear weapons capabilities was like a “small hole in a tire.”

Even a small hole makes the tire go flat, one official said. He added that there were countries in Europe, eastern Europe and Asia who were very keen on doing business with Iran, and who were just waiting for a signal that the sanctions regime is weakening to make their move back into the Iranian market.

Michael Wilner contributed to this report from Washington.