Iran now pushes for an end to arms embargo in nuclear deal

[webfact]

Iran now pushes for an end to arms embargo in nuclear deal
By GEORGE JAHN

VIENNA (AP) — As negotiators braced for yet another possible extension of nuclear talks, Iran demanded on Monday that any deal should include the end to a U.N. arms embargo as well — a condition backed by Russia but opposed by the United States as it seeks to limit Tehran's Mideast influence.

Late last month, Iran and six world powers gave themselves an extra week past June 30 after it became clear that that original deadline could not be met. The sides now are trying to work out a deal that would limit Iran's nuclear program in exchange for the easing of tens of billions of dollars in economic penalties on the Islamic Republic.

But disagreements persisted as the sides moved close to the new Tuesday deadline, and White House spokesman Josh Earnest said another extension was "certainly possible."

Negotiators had previously mentioned the mechanics of curbing Iran's nuclear programs and the time and pacing of economic sanctions relief as the most contentious problems. But an Iranian official — briefing reporters on condition of anonymity — said Monday that ending the arms embargo was an important part of the deal.

The Iranian decision to publicly bring that issue into the mix suggested that disputes ran deeper than just over the most widely aired issues.

A preliminary nuclear deal reached in April did not specifically name the arms embargo on Iran as part of the long-term accord. But a U.S. fact-sheet issued at the time said that the deal now being worked on would result in "the comprehensive lifting of all U.N. Security Council sanctions" on the Islamic Republic, which could be interpreted to include the arms embargo.

Still, the U.S. also said at the time that "important restrictions on conventional arms and ballistic missiles" would be incorporated in any new U.N. guidelines for Iran.

Both Russia and China have expressed support for at least a partial lifting of the arms embargo. Moscow, in particular, is interested in military cooperation and in Russian arms sales to Tehran, including the long-delayed transfer of S-300 advanced air defense systems — something long opposed by Washington.

The U.S. doesn't want the arms ban ended because it fears Tehran could expand its military assistance for Syrian President Bashar Assad, for Houthi rebels in Yemen fighting a U.S. backed Arab coalition and for Lebanon-based Hezbollah, which opposes Israel. Lifting the embargo also would increase already strong opposition to the deal in Congress and in Israel.

With the arms embargo prohibiting both exports of weapons to Iran and exports by Iran — and Russia wanting to sell arms to Tehran — one possible solution would be lifting the ban only on importing weapons to the Islamic Republic and not on exports.

Iran also wants to have a hand in shaping any Security Council resolution that would endorse a comprehensive nuclear deal, if one is reached, the Iranian official said.

He offered no details but told reporters that Iran and Security Council members at the nuclear talks are drafting language for a proposed U.N. resolution and that Tehran is seeking a shift from the critical tone of previous resolutions on its nuclear program. All five Security Council members — the U.S., Russia, China, Britain and France — are at the table with Iran, along with Germany.

A U.S. official confirmed that a resolution text was being discussed at the talks. Both the Iranian and the U.S. officials demanded anonymity because they weren't authorized to discuss the issue publicly.

The Iranian official spoke of good progress on some previously divisive topics. At the same time, he said some disputes may have to be resolved by the foreign ministers of the nations at the talks. All seven were either in Vienna or arriving by day's end.

Over the weekend, diplomats reported tentative agreement on the speed and scope of sanctions relief for Iran in the potential accord, even as issues such as inspection guidelines and limits on Iran's nuclear research and development remained contentious.

Iran says its nuclear ambitions are peaceful, but the U.S. and its allies fear the program could be turned toward making weapons.

With the deadline nearing, negotiators prepared Monday for a late-night session that diplomats said could extend into early Tuesday.

It's in the Obama administration's interest to have a deal by Thursday — if one is to be had. After Thursday, Congress' time to review the deal grows from 30 to 60 days. President Barack Obama would have to await that review before being able to ease sanctions agreed to in a deal. Also in that period, lawmakers could try to build a veto-proof majority behind new legislation that could impose new sanctions on Iran or prevent Obama from suspending existing ones.
___

AP Diplomatic Writer Matthew Lee contributed to this report.


-- (c) Associated Press 2015-07-07

[ezzra]

Why don't they give them too? by all means, allow them what ever they want, they're getting what

they want anyway from the prostrating Obama and the Euro people....

All Russia want to do is to sell arm to those carpet merchants... they don't give a flying fart how

is this move going to upset and disturb the delicate balance that already giving sleepless nights

to some of the surrounding courtiers there, they want to sell arm and da hell with the consequences....

[Credo]

It is in Russia's interest to have destabilized ME and a shift in the balance of power. This could interrupt oil supplies to the West and increase profits for Russia as well as its importance as a world power.

[ggold]

Is Iran really interested in making a deal with Obama? I wonder which is more desperate Iran or Obama, There is only one fool though, that is Obama who is having rings run around him in his desperation.

I am pretty sure Iran is laughing at Obama, not behind his back but to his face!

Edited July 7, 2015 by ggold

[Chicog]

Is Iran really interested in making a deal with Obama? I wonder which is more desperate Iran or Obama, There is only one fool though, that is Obama who is having rings run around him in his desperation.

I am pretty sure Iran is laughing at Obama, not behind his back but to his face!

What rings exactly?

Do you have a magical insight into the negotiations?

[Jimlove]

Allowing #1 sponsor of Terror in the World to get Nuklear weapons within a few years ... Yep, that makes sense ...

Mr. B. Hussein Obama has shown his value ...

Edited July 7, 2015 by Jimlove

[Publicus]

The Pentagon and SecDef Ashton Carter have been saying since April it's ready to go.....

How the U.S. Would Destroy Iran’s Nuclear Program

The Massive Ordnance Penetrator hits a test target.

http://time.com/3771077/iran-nuclear-program-bunker-buster/

https://youtu.be/WlaIl9J14H4

[arjunadawn]

Really? What rings? Indeed, lets just look at two other authors with magical insight.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2015/06/16/iran-nuclear-negotiations-become-farce-as-obama-possibly-caves-again

http://www.wsj.com/articles/reuel-marc-gerecht-and-mark-dubowitz-irans-negotiating-triumph-over-obama-and-america-1428099801

If it were not so deadly serious I would think you were joking.

[Chicog]

Really? What rings? Indeed, lets just look at two other authors with magical insight.

http://www.usnews.com/opinion/blogs/world-report/2015/06/16/iran-nuclear-negotiations-become-farce-as-obama-possibly-caves-again

http://www.wsj.com/articles/reuel-marc-gerecht-and-mark-dubowitz-irans-negotiating-triumph-over-obama-and-america-1428099801

If it were not so deadly serious I would think you were joking.

Well I can't read the second one because of a paywall, but the first one is obviously poorly written because - once again - the US is not negotiating this agreement on its own.

And it seems to make a big deal about the agreement not covering past activities.

Which doesn't surprise me. What are they supposed to do, go back in a time machine and stop their nuclear program in 2003?

But then I see the author is from a well known conservative "think tank".

So, there is no real substance to the first one.

What's the meat of the second one?

Maybe you can quote the highlights.

Edited July 7, 2015 by Chicog

[ggold]

Is Iran really interested in making a deal with Obama? I wonder which is more desperate Iran or Obama, There is only one fool though, that is Obama who is having rings run around him in his desperation.

I am pretty sure Iran is laughing at Obama, not behind his back but to his face!

What rings exactly?

Do you have a magical insight into the negotiations?

The point is deadlines have come and gone yet still no agreement. The Iranians seem to make more demands each time and each time Kerry extends the deadline. If it's such a done deal as the news seems to claim why no deal yet?

You're sarcasm apart!

[Chicog]

Is Iran really interested in making a deal with Obama? I wonder which is more desperate Iran or Obama, There is only one fool though, that is Obama who is having rings run around him in his desperation.

I am pretty sure Iran is laughing at Obama, not behind his back but to his face!

What rings exactly?

Do you have a magical insight into the negotiations?

The point is deadlines have come and gone yet still no agreement. The Iranians seem to make more demands each time and each time Kerry extends the deadline. If it's such a done deal as the news seems to claim why no deal yet?

You're sarcasm apart!

You say "deadlines have come and gone yet still no agreement". Then you say the newspapers are claiming it is a done deal. Do you know something they don't, or are you simply speculating?

The official line from all parties is that terms of an agreement are close enough to merit extending the deadline again.

That's all I know. What do you know?

[chuckd]

All we read about are the two protagonists in this deal, the US and Iran.

Having heard nothing from the UK, Russia, China or Germany and very little from France...are they even attending these negotiating sessions?

If there are other players of any consequence, exactly what are they saying?

[Chicog]

Next to Nothing. Most of it is just speculation.

Added:

This is a news crawler and there's very little by way of British comment on the topic apart from a BBC article:

http://www.newsnow.co.uk/h/Hot+Topics/Iran+Nuclear+Programme

Progress has been made - one Iranian newspaper reported that there was agreement on the main body of the accord and four of the five annexes. But several sticking points remain, including limits on nuclear research and development and guidelines for inspections.

Tehran is also demanding that the UN ban on the import and export of conventional arms and ballistic missiles be lifted as part of any deal, a senior Iranian official said on Monday.

The text of a new UN Security Council resolution is being drafted, but the US and its European allies oppose lifting the arms embargo because Iran has been accused of fomenting unrest in the Middle East. Russia and China have expressed support.

US Secretary of State John Kerry wants an agreement finalised by Wednesday at the latest so that it can be submitted to the US Congress for approval by Thursday. If a deal is presented later, the review period will double from 30 days to 60.

<snip>

Officials from the global nuclear watchdog, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) meanwhile held "intense discussions" with officials in Tehran about the possible military dimensions of Iran's nuclear programme.

The IAEA has said Iran has failed to give a satisfactory explanation of its research at a military site into detonators that could be used to trigger a nuclear weapon or explained studies that could help calculate the explosive yield of one.

http://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-33424502

Edited July 7, 2015 by Chicog

[Halion]

JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT THAT IT COULD NOT GET WORSE. They are playing the US like an old Banjo. Replace Kerry and his team of tree huggers

[Chicog]

JUST WHEN YOU THOUGHT THAT IT COULD NOT GET WORSE. They are playing the US like an old Banjo. Replace Kerry and his team of tree huggers

You've heard of the "P5+1" right?

[Alwyn]

Give Iran nuclear capabilities and free access to arms... What could possibly go wrong? I guess we would need to say goodbye to Israel

[konying]

Is Iran really interested in making a deal with Obama? I wonder which is more desperate Iran or Obama, There is only one fool though, that is Obama who is having rings run around him in his desperation.

I am pretty sure Iran is laughing at Obama, not behind his back but to his face!

The other day Iran made an announcement that US will remain its enemy no matter of the deal and talks.

Its pretty clear to even a blind and deaf, Iran is just wasting time to compete its nuke program.

Every time negotiations come to almost complete, Iran comes up with a new demand.

Every time negotiations stall, world gives them a break and starts making offers.

How many years now have there been talks and negotiations? 6?7? and each and every time, inspectors get refused entry to main locations;

So pretty clear there will be no deal while Obama is in, but then again there may not be a peaceful deal at all

[konying]

Give Iran nuclear capabilities and free access to arms... What could possibly go wrong? I guess we would need to say goodbye to Israel

And to Syria, Libya, Lebanon, Iraq and a few others

[konying]

All we read about are the two protagonists in this deal, the US and Iran.

Having heard nothing from the UK, Russia, China or Germany and very little from France...are they even attending these negotiating sessions?

If there are other players of any consequence, exactly what are they saying?

Sadly Russia, the only one with any kind of influence over Iran will say and do anything to oppose US, since the latest Ukraine fiasco.

Obama really did not think through when he decided to interfere in Ukraine.

Should have first closed the deal over Iran, before pissing off the Russians

[Publicus]

All we read about are the two protagonists in this deal, the US and Iran.

Having heard nothing from the UK, Russia, China or Germany and very little from France...are they even attending these negotiating sessions?

If there are other players of any consequence, exactly what are they saying?

All of the foreign ministers of the P5+1 are present at the negotiations with the foreign minister of Iran.

Nato members, which are the USA, Germany, UK and also non-member France, are completely opposed to Iran's latest demand that the UN lift its arms embargo, initiated in 2006 and extended in 2010 in addition to the EU&USA arms embargo restrictions against Iran. The UN General Assembly supports the P5+1 Nato negotiators because failure of an agreement would be draconian, of that there is little or no doubt.

Russia and the CCP China are supporting Iran in this demand. However, the three do not realistically expect the UN embargo to be lifted, so Iran would accept lifting of the import restrictions only, which is unacceptable to the United States, the Arab League, the Gulf Council in particular; Israel, Nato members.

After 13 years of negotiations that began between Iran and the EU-3 in 2002 that are presently the P5+1, Iran, Russia, the CCP China pose the real risk of creating a bipolar world of authoritarian states working actively against Nato, its ME partners and allies, and other major democracies, such as Japan, South Korea, India, Indonesia, to include of course, Israel, as well as Ukraine among others.

The negotiators over time have resolved some very tough-nut issues involving extended deadlines and torturous marathon sessions and splitting hairs of differences, so this escalation by Iran is a last-minute tactic, not a strategy that should be resolved even if more time might be needed yet again.

Iran meanwhile, has close to a couple of hundred billion in bucks lined up for investment once an agreement is reached, most of which would go down the crapper if there is no agreement because military action would then be assured with no significant opposition from the EU or anywhere else.

Edited July 8, 2015 by Publicus

[Seastallion]

Is Iran really interested in making a deal with Obama? I wonder which is more desperate Iran or Obama, There is only one fool though, that is Obama who is having rings run around him in his desperation.

I am pretty sure Iran is laughing at Obama, not behind his back but to his face!

What rings exactly?

Do you have a magical insight into the negotiations?

The point is deadlines have come and gone yet still no agreement. The Iranians seem to make more demands each time and each time Kerry extends the deadline. If it's such a done deal as the news seems to claim why no deal yet?

You're sarcasm apart!

Well, of course deadlines come and go because the US is reneging.

"..... a U.S. fact-sheet issued at the time said that the deal now being worked on would result in "the comprehensive lifting of all U.N. Security Council sanctions" on the Islamic Republic, which could be interpreted to include the arms embargo."

Now they (the US) want to use the talks to have a poke at Russia.

These talks are not just about the 5+1 and Iran...there is politicking amongst the 5+1, big time!

[Publicus]

The US and other Nato countries have made overtures to Iran concerning combating IS. So let's see what a possible final tortured agreement might look like after all the armtwisting and mental anguish is concluded.

From left, US Secretary of Energy Ernest Moniz, Secretary of State John Kerry, together with the other P5+1 foreign ministers Philip Hammond (not seen) of Britain, Sergey Lavrov of Russia, Frank-Walter Steinmeier of Germany, Laurent Fabius of France and Wang Yi of China. Also shown are top EU foreign policy officials Helga Schmid and Federica Mogherini, Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif and Iran's ambassador to the IAEA Ali Akbar Salehi, sit in Vienna, Austria, July 6, 2015. (photo by REUTERS/Leonhard Foeger)

[geriatrickid]

Some of you guys are being unduly harsh on the US. None of the other participants including Russia wants a nuclear armed Iran. As much as Russia would like to stick to the USA, Putin detests muslims more. One need only look to how Putin's Russia has treated its ethnic muslims and waged its war in Chechnya. Putin's Russia is not given to concerns about collateral damage, or human rights when it takes on its muslims. The last thing Putin or any Russian leader will accept is having a bunch of religious wackos on its border having access to a nuclear weapon. The European participants are not going to accept it either. Lest anyone forget, both France and the UK have suffered jihadist attacks and they will not accept a nuclear armed Iran, particularly a country that has previously said it could and would bomb Europe.

The US is playing the bad cop in the negotiations while others play the good cop. However, I don't doubt for a minute that they are all on the same page when it comes to Iran. I wouldn't be surprised that when the world takes on Iran, one of the agreements will be to allow Russia to move into some Iranian territory.