FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail

Why There is Still No Iran Nuke Deal in Vienna

VIENNA 

As the Iran-P5+1 negotiation hit the crucial stage on Monday night, and the technical teams pushed for a clean text to be released on Tuesday – albeit unsuccessfully – the top sticking point turned out to be the conventional arms embargo imposed on Iran by the UNSC, a senior European diplomat told Asia Times.

BRICS members Russia and China had a coordinated position; “yes” to the end of the embargo. The US and the UK voted “no.” And, crucially, France was wavering.

If this was a decision solely in the hands of French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius, the vote would be “no.” But arguably if the final decision rests with President Francois Hollande, it would be a “yes.” There is nothing the French weapons industry would like better than to add Tehran to its still meager list of customers for Rafales and Mistrals.

Turning to the Big Picture, Iranian diplomats were stressing that, “all nuclear-related sanctions should be removed. That was agreed upon in Lausanne.” This means the conventional arms embargo – imposed by the UN in 2007, and tied up in the nuclear sanctions – should also go.

So what was reported by Asia Times early this week continued to apply; there are severe cracks within the P5+1 on several key issues — thus their need to spend more time negotiating amongst themselves than with Iran.

That’s the key reason for a new deadline extension — to Thursday, July 9. And even that may not be the end of the road.

All those brackets

With only 24 hours left before this Tuesday’s D-Day, signs were extremely mixed. The Iranian delegation emphasized, “this was not a deadlock”; after all, the P5+1 foreign ministers were meeting late into the night for the second time in a frantic day. Iranian negotiators were insisting, “Iran is ready to continue as long as there is opportunity of progress.”

Still, the new tentative deadline — Thursday — was already being floated. The Russians, for their part, were getting ready to leave Vienna by Tuesday night; the next immediate destination – which initially should count on the presence of Iranian Foreign Minister Zarif as well – is the crucial, simultaneous BRICS and SCO summits in Ufa, Russia. The SCO will actively start discussing accepting Iran as a member as early as next year in their summit in India.

Although always careful to point out they were not pressed for time, a measure of frustration regarding the real intentions of their American counterparts started to seep in among Iranian diplomats; “If they cannot translate political intention into political decisions we will have to close down these negotiations.”

Still, “both sides don’t want to lose momentum.” Kerry’s rather undiplomatic Sunday move — “the deal could go either way” — was interpreted by the Iranians as a message to placate the internal front (in the US), and win the battle for public opinion at home. Mostly what the Iranians retained was “we’re progressing.”

It’s hard to fathom the complexities hidden in an exhaustively detailed, 85-page text with five attachments. Iranian officials describe it as “a package of 85 pages with lots of brackets.” As one of them put it, “even for a word, or sometimes a preposition, we have to spend a full two hour meeting on the technical level.” “Success” is measured when negotiators are able to clear 15 to 20 brackets a day.

What was soon defined at the final stretch is that after the agreement, “a resolution will be tabled.” The UNSC will “take note” of what was agreed at in Vienna. And then this resolution will suspend all past resolutions on the day of implementation. “The benefit of this resolution,” adds an Iranian technical expert, “ is to record the agreement in Vienna. And then everything passes under the jurisdiction of the UNSC.”

Deep into a warm Viennese night, with the legendary Café Sacher already closed, it was still a long way to go. In a hotel room, an Iranian diplomat mused; “The Americans created a structure of sanctions they don’t want to destroy. Emotionally, they want to keep it.” It’s no wonder that most of the unresolved brackets in the final text still relate to US and EU sanctions.

And there was the rub, once again; would the Obama administration, to its credit, finally let go of the weapon of choice of US foreign policy? That would be worthy of a gala celebration at the Vienna Staatsoper.

This piece first appeared in Asia Times.

More articles by:

Pepe Escobar is the author of Globalistan: How the Globalized World is Dissolving into Liquid War (Nimble Books, 2007), Red Zone Blues: a snapshot of Baghdad during the surge and Obama does Globalistan (Nimble Books, 2009).  His latest book is Empire of ChaosHe may be reached at pepeasia@yahoo.com.

Weekend Edition
September 21, 2018
Friday - Sunday
Paul Street
Laquan McDonald is Being Tried for His Own Racist Murder
Brad Evans
What Does It Mean to Celebrate International Peace Day?
Alexandra Isfahani-Hammond
Hurricane Florence and 9.7 Million Pigs
Nick Pemberton
With or Without Kavanaugh, The United States Is Anti-Choice
Andrew Levine
Israel’s Anti-Semitism Smear Campaign
Jim Kavanagh
“Taxpayer Money” Threatens Medicare-for-All (And Every Other Social Program)
Jonathan Cook
Palestine: The Testbed for Trump’s Plan to Tear up the Rules-Based International Order
Jeffrey St. Clair
Roaming Charges: the Chickenhawks Have Finally Come Back Home to Roost!
David Rosen
As the Capitalist World Turns: From Empire to Imperialism to Globalization?
Jonah Raskin
Green Capitalism Rears Its Head at Global Climate Action Summit
James Munson
On Climate, the Centrists are the Deplorables
Robert Hunziker
Is Paris 2015 Already Underwater?
Arshad Khan
Will Their Ever be Justice for Rohingya Muslims?
Jill Richardson
Why Women Don’t Report Sexual Assault
Dave Clennon
A Victory for Historical Accuracy and the Peace Movement: Not One Emmy for Ken Burns and “The Vietnam War”
W. T. Whitney
US Harasses Cuba Amid Mysterious Circumstances
Nathan Kalman-Lamb
Things That Make Sports Fans Uncomfortable
George Capaccio
Iran: “Snapping Back” Sanctions and the Threat of War
Kenneth Surin
Brexit is Coming, But Which Will It Be?
Louis Proyect
Moore’s “Fahrenheit 11/9”: Entertaining Film, Crappy Politics
Ramzy Baroud
Why Israel Demolishes: Khan Al-Ahmar as Representation of Greater Genocide
Ben Dangl
The Zapatistas’ Dignified Rage: Revolutionary Theories and Anticapitalist Dreams of Subcommandante Marcos
Ron Jacobs
Faith, Madness, or Death
Bill Glahn
Crime Comes Knocking
Terry Heaton
Pat Robertson’s Hurricane “Miracle”
Dave Lindorff
In Montgomery County PA, It’s Often a Jury of White People
Louis Yako
From Citizens to Customers: the Corporate Customer Service Culture in America 
William Boardman
The Shame of Dianne Feinstein, the Courage of Christine Blasey Ford 
Ernie Niemi
Logging and Climate Change: Oregon is Appalachia and Timber is Our Coal
Jessicah Pierre
Nike Says “Believe in Something,” But Can It Sacrifice Something, Too?
Paul Fitzgerald - Elizabeth Gould
Weaponized Dreams? The Curious Case of Robert Moss
Olivia Alperstein
An Environmental 9/11: the EPA’s Gutting of Methane Regulations
Ted Rall
Why Christine Ford vs. Brett Kavanaugh is a Train Wreck You Can’t Look Away From
Lauren Regan
The Day the Valves Turned: Defending the Pipeline Protesters
Ralph Nader
Questions, Questions Where are the Answers?
Binoy Kampmark
Deplatforming Germaine Greer
Raouf Halaby
It Should Not Be A He Said She Said Verdict
Robert Koehler
The Accusation That Wouldn’t Go Away
Jim Hightower
Amazon is Making Workers Tweet About How Great It is to Work There
Robby Sherwin
Rabbi, Rabbi, Where For Art Thou Rabbi?
Vern Loomis
Has Something Evil This Way Come?
Steve Baggarly
Disarm Trident Walk Ends in Georgia
Graham Peebles
Priorities of the Time: Peace
Michael Doliner
The Department of Demonization
David Yearsley
Bollocks to Brexit: the Plumber Sings
FacebookTwitterGoogle+RedditEmail