What does it mean? Who knows?
When might we learn? Who knows?
Acording to a Fox “breaking news” report,
Under the deal, Iran agreed to limit its uranium enrichment to 5 percent — the grade commonly used to power reactors. The deal also commits Iran to stop producing 20 percent enriched uranium — which is only a technical step away from weapons-grade material — and to neutralize its 20 percent stockpile.
In exchange, economic sanctions Iran faces would be eased for a period of six months. During that time, the world powers — Britain, China, France, Germany, Russia and the United States — would continue negotiations with Iran on a permanent deal.
The West fears Iran’s nuclear program could allow it to build a nuclear bomb. Iran says its program is for peaceful purposes, such as medical research and power generation.
According to an article at The Times of Israel,
TEHRAN, Iran — Iran and six world powers have agreed on how to implement a nuclear deal struck in November, with its terms starting from January 20, the Islamic Republic’s official state news agency reported Sunday.
The report from IRNA quoted Iranian Deputy Foreign Minister Abbas Araqchi confirming the news, without offering any other details. There was no immediate confirmation from the other countries involved in the talks, though the semi-official ISNA news agency said a joint statement on the agreement would be released in Geneva and Tehran.
The announcement comes after Araqchi said Friday that an initial agreement had been reached and all sides would respond to it by Sunday.
US President Barack Obama hailed the agreement to implement the deal as a step to “advance our goal of preventing Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon.”
“With today’s agreement, we have made concrete progress,” he said in a statement. “I welcome this important step forward, and we will now focus on the critical work of pursuing a comprehensive resolution that addresses our concerns over Iran’s nuclear program. I have no illusions about how hard it will be to achieve this objective, but for the sake of our national security and the peace and security of the world, now is the time to give diplomacy a chance to succeed.”
The P5 +1 November 24th “deal” is hardly a model of comprehensive lucidity, as I noted here and here. Among other matters, it fails even to mention the Iranian military facilility at Parchin, where implosion tests are alleged to have been made, development of missiles capable of delivering nuclear warheads and development of nuclear warheads themselves. As noted in my linked articles, Iran has claimed recent successes in the latter two areas.
Perhaps more information will be provided eventually on what, if anything, obviated objections to proceeding and why. Perhaps that information will be more illuminating than the text of the November 24th “deal” and inconsistent commentary by the Obama Administran and Iran’s leaders. Perhaps Iran will cease to have the capability to produce and deliver nuclear weapons, short or long term. Perhaps it will snow in Florida this July 4th.
In an article posted today Barry Rubin offered several trenchant observations. His article does not deal principally with the Iranian nuke mess, but this quotation does:
He who wins is he who will compromise less, not he who is willing to compromise more. [Emphasis added.]
This principle is the same everywhere in the Middle East. Iran is willing to risk having the negotiations fall apart, and so is Karzai’s government in Afghanistan. Remember, he who is willing to let the negotiations fall apart will win, like a game of chicken not a game of bridge, like a game of backgammon not like chess. [Emphasis added.]
Without considering any reason transcending domestic politics, President Obama needs a “victory” in negotiations with Iran. Anything that can be characterized as victory will suffice. Hence, He is prepared to concede just about anything that Iran demands. If, as I suspect, concessions and a final agreement will give President Obama what He wants — an upward shove in the polls — Iran will get what she wants — nuclear weapons capability for the short as well as long term and Middle East dominance in the long term. Will that benefit the United States? No, but that seems to be of little or no consequence.