Major Deal Agreed on Tehran Uranium

I think whatever one's doubts about Ahmedi and his team and their dealings with the internal opposition, on the diplomatic front their pro-active engagement with non-aligned members of the UNSC has paid off and they deserve congrats for that. Many Western politicians the likes of Clinton and Merkel are deeply in the pockets of their Israeli friends and whatever Iran does they are unlikely to change their allegiances. To have two, albeit non-permanent members, supporting its position will have a definite impact on the attitudes of the others. There is a real chance that international relations will have a more level playing field than they have ever had in the UNSC.

bravo dr sahimi,again you amaze me,with such an indepth anaylsis of the situation.
i have to give this regime B+ for their poltical game playing,if things go as expected,we can see that iranians bought time and eventually got their way.if we can trust their intentions'
great article

I caannot agree more rezvan.

The most important achievement in this agreement is what Rezvan has eluded to, the sidelining of the EU and US. We can say whatever we want about Ahmadi, but his administration has down one-two punch never seen in international community. First, they countered US international offensive nuclear position against Iran by a conference of their own, in Tehran, which resulted a neutralization of the Obama position in the NPT conference in NY. Second, Iran has opened an alternative path to international diplomacy by negotiating and agreeing with 2 non-alient member nations, thus empowering the non-aligned movement for the first time. It is likely, if successful, Iran can return to this path to defuse future internation tensions with the single minded west.

One more thing that is visible, is that the Iranian government does depend on public opinion, and the notions that sanctions are good for hardliners and that they don't care about people is too simple of an explaination. This deal shows the regime cares about its constituency and has responded with an international diplomatic coup.

Even though I dissagree Iran's 2009 election was fraudulant or that Iran's economy is any trouble, once again, Mr. Sahimi has added to our knowledge by writing a comprehensive article. I thank him.

Let's not all pat Ahmadinejad on the back all at once.....

Surely the neo-cons will find a way to scuttle this deal.

Who benefits by keeping the threat of another war on the horizon? Answer that and you will begin to figure out what is going on in the Middle East and Central Asia.

Good question -- can the US take "yes" for an answer. (particularly given the suspicion that parts of the Obama Team, eg DR, all along were assuming that Iran would reject the deal -- so that we could then have greater international cover for sanctions, pre-emptive this or that, etc.) Ah, but those "dastardly" Iranians, they've actually done something quite within their national interests. How fiendish, how un-civilized!?

I am puzzled by one line in your analysis, that "the hardliners also benefit from the agreement." Perhaps. On the other hand, there are those inside the DC beltway who have built their reputations of late claiming that "the hardliners need an American bogey," that it's somehow their raison d'etre. (a view I don't share)

Yet might it not also be suggested that Iranian reformists benefit from this deal too -- precisely IF tensions with the US are reduced. They won't so easily be tarred with the brush of being fifth columns for a looming foreign attack.

Alas, it appears that the US cannot take yes from the Iranians for an answer. Clinton today is whistling Dixie in claiming the Russian & China are on board to vote for new sanctions on Iran. (because the US has now moved the cheese, saying that Iran must cease all enrichment.) That sophistry w will fly with the "sanctions at any cost crowd" (Gary Sick's telling phrase), but I'll be amazed if the US can even now get a majority of the Security Council to go along with such "schoolyard behavior".....

Shouldn't you people have waited a little longer for the reactions from all parties involved before declaring victory? Just like the hostage crisis, they dragged it so long that it came back to bite them. The problem with Iranians in general is lack of management. It shows in the way the country is run, in the way the Green movement is handled and now the nuclear issue. Finally, when nothing works out, simply blame it on the Shahollahies or the Zionists. When are we going to learn? There is no future for the Iranian people with the Barbaric Republic. Stop rushing to write an article to direct public opinion. It does not work anymore. Your methods are outdated and ineffective.
Where is your information on the additional $1B contract Iran signed with Brazil this week as payoff for the nuclear agreement? What did we offer to Turkey? Diplomatic prestige?
-----------------------------------

The United States won agreement from China, Russia and other major powers on tough new sanctions against Iran's nuclear program Tuesday, a day after Tehran sought to stave off penalties through a deal to swap nuclear materials.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton told a Senate committee that the five veto-wielding members of the U.N. Security Council — Britain, China, France, Russia and the U.S. — along with Germany would present the full council with a draft resolution later Tuesday, capping months of diplomatic maneuvering and painstaking negotiations.

Clinton said she spent Tuesday morning on the phone with Russian Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov "finalizing the resolution." Details were not immediately released, but the sanctions are expected to broaden economic penalties on Iranian officials and institutions.
The agreement appeared to be a significant victory for the Obama administration, which doggedly pursued sanctions since Iran rebuffed U.S. overtures last year. The pursuit was complicated by initial resistance from Russia and China, either of which could have vetoed the deal.

But in recent weeks, Russia and China have been persuaded to support at least some degree of increased pressure on Iran.

Perhaps more significantly, Clinton's announcement came just one day after Iran, Brazil and Turkey said they had agreed on a plan for Iran to swap nuclear materials.

Many believed the last-minute agreement would blunt the U.S.-led drive for a fourth round of U.N penalties on Iran.

Clinton said the agreement on a new resolution by the major powers was a rejection of Iran's efforts to forestall penalties.

"This announcement is as convincing an answer to the efforts undertaken by Tehran over the last few days as any we could provide," Clinton told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"We don't believe it was any accident that Iran agreed to this declaration as we were preparing to move forward in New York," she said. "With all due respect to my Turkish and Brazilian friends, the fact that we had Russia on board, we had China on board and that we were moving early this week, namely today, to share the text of that resolution put pressure on Iran which they were trying to somehow dissipate."

Niloofar,

The other side of what you have correctly stated that 'we do not seem to learn fro our past' is that many of us Iranians are also very good at criticizing just about anything, however seldom offering a solution or even a glance in the direction of a possible solution.

What is your solution? What do you suggest as a sensible direction.

Respectfully,
Jamal

I'll keep it simple: By now Hillary Clinton will have have called the Israelis and asked, "What do you want us to do now"?

Thank you for your question Mr. Jamal. In response please allow me to quote one of our scholars who has correctly written, "A letter signed by 175 hard-line Majles (parliament) deputies was delivered to Sadegh Larijani, the judiciary chief, asking him to put Mousavi on trial. They claimed that because the executed people were mohareb (enemies of God), Mousavi's protest of their killing is a comparable offense. On Tuesday, Larijani responded, saying the letter interfered in the judiciary's work. In the interest of the political system, he announced, Ayatollah Ali Khamenei does not want Mousavi, Mehdi Karroubi, and Mohammad Khatami, the three main leaders of the Green Movement, to be arrested or put on trial." A simple snapshot of the Barbaric Republic.
Mr. jamal, one of the main problems my generation has encountered is the unwillingness of the older generation to listen to anything we have to say and reject it as simple, uncalled for or foolish.

Mr. Jamal, do you suppose after 31 years of repeated failures and lack of direction our scholars would recognize that theirs is a path to nowhere? That they need to reconsider their positions? That for the sake of the future of Iran they should put differences aside, swallow silly pride and unite with those who oppose the Barbaric Republic regardless of political affiliation with one true intention to save Iran?

Mr. Jamal, when an entire system is rotted out the presence of a single character i.e. Mousavi is a mere irrelevancy. Please consider this statement, "Saleh Noghreh Kar, a nephew of Dr. Zahra Rahnavard, Mousavi's wife, recently reported a conversation he had with Yazdanfar. When he asked the bodyguard why he has stayed with Mousavi for so long, rejecting numerous offers of other positions, Yazdanfar replied, "Mousavi is one of those rare people whose words and deeds are the same. I have stayed with him because of his honesty.""

Mr. Jamal, are we not missing the point? It is a simple fact, if it looks like a duck, flies like a duck, quacks like a duck, walks and swims like a duck then it must be a duck. Mr. Jamal, the Barbaric Republic cannot be revived. It is brain dead. It is ready for burial. Even if the Mahdi himself emerges from the well there is nothing he can do for it.

Before we even decide on a direction we must come together and stand united shoulder to shoulder and show the world [WE THE PEOPLE] exist. The rest will follow. All it takes is a little courage for our scholars to emerge out of their bunkers. Do you think our scholars are listening Mr. Jamal? Let's hope so, for Iran's sake and before it is another generation too late in misery and absolute poverty. May God bless our country.

Jamal

Iran has been able to enrich for the past 6 months to the point that the current shipment to outside Iran won't mean much. On the other hand, the current deal will show that the US and its allies want to simply sanction Iran.

They have no choice but to deny this deal, because accepting the current deal signed in Tehran would ensure that the superpowers, who were absent, will be sidelined. It also marks Tehran as the city where the roadmap was set for how nations can enrich uranium outside the global cartel.

Most people don't realize that the main reason for opposition on Iran is that the world's future energy, nuclear fuel, was devided among 5 global corporations owned and operated by US, EU, Japan, Russia, and China. The agreement also stipulated, though not legal, would not allow any other entity to enrich uranium in this world. No wonder the five permanent members have found common ground. If Iran is successful, it will be the world sixth enrichment site, and Brazil is likely to follow the Tehran Blueprint.

It is also important to recall that Russia only agreed to go along with the US when Obama agreed to withdraw his defense shield from Eastern Europe and cut down its nuclear arsenal. A considerable compromise. A deal they could not refuse, it's called diplomacy. There are those who redicule Iran when Iran cuts deals to advance the national agenda. It won't matter, the solution is exactly what the IR is doing. They are creating a third pole in the dual polarity of today's global politics by bringing the Non-aligned Nations to center stage, where Iran has considerable influence. Very smart.

It will no longer matter what the security counsel does, their vote to sanction will be delegitimized and that is exactly what Iran wants to continue to enrich with a faster pace with the new technology international community is calling the IR3 (for Iran3) ultra fast centrifuges being installed now.

I am sorry to interoject but I see no explaination where Niloofar would like Iran to go.

Let me explain something that has been explained many times before. The main reason Ayatollah Montazeri was removed from power was because he opposed the killing of thousands of prisoners. Those executions were carried out by the government of Mr. Mousavi. Unfortunately for some, when Ahmadinejad says "there are some people who think they own this country," he is correctly referring to Rafsanjani and Mousavi. They are the old guard, and they are not angels. Granted Mousavi served as PM at a very difficult time.

There is no question Niloufar points correctly for people to come together. Part of coming together means you are willing to accept the other side. I don't see a compromising tone from Niloufar. I want to know who are the two sides that she wants to come together? The Green Leaders should come together with who? Who is on the other side for Niloufar to accept? And what to do differently, specifically, once they are together? that is a good debate to have, instead of talking about these characters in Iran.

According to Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, he had been in “constant contact” with Clinton herself and with national security adviser James Jones, while his prime minister, Recep Tayyip Erdogan, had face-to-face encouragement from President Obama in December and April.

The objective of Turkey and Brazil was to persuade Iran to accept the terms of an agreement the United States had itself promoted only six months ago as a confidence-building measure and the precursor to more substantive talks. There were twelve visits back and forth between the Turk and his Iranian counterpart, some 40 phone conversations, and eighteen grueling hours of personal negotiations leading up to the presentation of the signed agreement on Monday.

“What they wanted us to do was give the confidence to Iran to do the swap. We have done our duty,” said Davutoglu, calling the deal an important step for regional and global peace. “We were told that if Iran gives 1,200 kg without conditions, then the required atmosphere of trust would be created [to avoid sanctions]. So if we do all these things, and they still talk about sanctions … [it] will damage the psychological trust that has been created.”

The Turks and Brazilians, who felt they had “delivered” Iran on the terms demanded by the United States, were surprised and disappointed at the negative reactions from Washington. Little did they know that their success in Tehran, which had been given a 0-30 percent chance just days earlier, came just as the Americans were putting the final touches on a package of sanctions to be presented to the UN Security Council. The Tehran agreement was as welcome as a pothole in the fast lane, and the Americans were not reluctant to let their displeasure be known.

http://www.csmonitor.com/World/2010/0518/US-answer-to-Iran-nuclear-swap-Overnight-deal-on-sanctions

the UN Security Council. The Tehran agreement was as welcome as a pothole in the fast lane, and the Americans were not reluctant to let their displeasure be known.

The five major powers had made up their minds (without consulting other members of the Security Council that currently includes both Turkey and Brazil), and these two mid-level powers were told in so many words to get out of the way.

The gratuitous insult aside, which approach do you believe would most likely result in real progress in slowing or halting Iran’s nuclear program? We have been imposing ever-greater sanctions on Iran for more than fifteen years. When we started they had zero centrifuges; today they have in excess of 9,000. To those who believe that one more package of sanctions will do what no other sanctions have done so far, I can only say I admire your unquenchable optimism.

More likely the Turkish ambassador to the UN had it about right when he said quite plainly about sanctions, “They don’t work.”

Would a negotiating track do better, perhaps mediated by two middle-level powers who have built up some credibility with Iran, like Algeria when it finally engineered the end to the US-Iran hostage crisis in 1980-81? We’ll never know. Tonight the hardliners in Iran (and their American counterparts) are celebrating.

The Iranian hardliners had already begun asking questions about the deal, fearful that Iran had given away too much. Now they don’t have to worry since everyone knows that Iran will never be willing or able to negotiate under the threat of sanctions.

For the Revolutionary Guards it is a huge bonus. As foreign companies are driven away, the Guards progressively take over more and more of the economy. And as restrictions on trade grow, so do their opportunities to manage the immensely profitable smuggling routes. Like their American counterparts, but for different reasons, they thrive on an environment of threat and isolation.

The presidents of Turkey and Brazil have been humiliated. But the Great Powers are confident that their lesser cousins know their place and will show deference when the chips are down. They’ll do what they have to do. They always do.

Don’t they… ?

http://garysick.tumblr.com/

Iran Threatens to Pull out of Nuclear Deal over new UN Sanctions

http://www.juancole.com/2010/05/iran-threatens-to-pull-out-of-nuclear-exchange-deal-over-new-un-sanctions.html

interesting comments by anonymous

I dont comment much for the authors of the respected scholars on Iran whom i have leant them much for the last years from SAHIMI, PARSI to project associate's of US's Think thanks.. and i see them that they have developed a respected voice in the US's Political beltway.. having said that, I thank this great article to Professor Sahimi whom i have once misunderstood him due to his endless critizinig to the IR's current government. for the deal, it is a great acheivement for Iran and for the third world as a whole..

One Last question to Niloofar with all respect: Can you take "yes" for an answer from Iran?

Respectfully.