Iran atom talks re-scheduled in Moscow

[longbrained]

After two days of negotiation stretching to midnight from morning, the only thing that was decided was to meet in Moscow next month.

Iranian team called the talks useless and initially threatened to leave, but Ashton convinced them to stay. The Iranian team also called western offer to stop enrichment for air craft spare parts a joke.

But Ashton insisted that talks were useful despite disagreements and had a "one to one" and "private" meeting with Jalili alone. It was then proposed by Europeans to set the avenue for next talk in Geneva but Iranians refused and instead said that they could only fly as far as Moscow. So it was agreed in Moscow next month.

Iran said that it will not agree to stop 20% enrichment without removal of sanctions. But western teams were saying that once sanctions are applied, it is very difficult to impossible to remove sanctions. The only thing the west could offer was to soften the future sanctions on their way. Iran rejected and and now the rest of talk will be done in Moscow.

I guess the Moscow talks will be extended to Beijing and then from there to Damascus.

 

[somebozo]

Iranian haggling as usual!

 

[IranZamin]

Head negotiator is jalili, he is from city of Mashad. They are known for being ''tough'' in Iran

Iranian haggling as usual!

Its none of your business what Iran does so keep your comments for yourself

Longbrained, what is your prediction for the talks in Moscow ?

 

[bozorgmehr]

Head negotiator is jalili, he is from city of Mashad. They are known for being ''tough'' in Iran

I wish he was esfohooni. They wouldn't know what hit them lol...

Its none of your business what Iran does so keep your comments for yourself

Relax!!! What's with the aggressive attitude? This is a public forum. People can comment as they wish, as long as it is within the rules.

 

[IranZamin]

I wish he was esfohooni. They wouldn't know what hit them lol...

Dont worry, i am sure there are Esfehooni officials in the Iranian delegation

Relax!!! What's with the aggressive attitude? This is a public forum. People can comment as they wish, as long as it is within the rules.

If it was meant to be agressive i would have written in Caps lock
This guy is just a troll and he is no friend of Iran and its people. He would like to see suffering of the country and downfall of the Iranian government.

 

[Hack-Hook]

Iranian haggling as usual!

come on , in middle east every body do haggle . well I heard in china they also do haggle .

 

[longbrained]

Longbrained, what is your prediction for the talks in Moscow ?

First, I must say that I consider this talk to be a tactical win for Iran, since they have basically imposed themselves on west. But there is more in play. From the language of talks it seems west is more desperate than Iran to have a successful deal. Iranian negotiators knew this weakness and capitalized on it by trying to extract more concessions from west.

In the past months some stuff have come out in open. The western economic instability, Israeli military and bureaucratic opposition to war with Iran, US inability to fight any more wars etc have become more apparent than few years ago. It is now more probable that the talk of war is just a propaganda to coerce Iran into a agreement favorable to western long term interests and Iranians know about this as evident from their conduct of talks in Baghdad.

I have also a "feel" that Obama is really desperate to have a kind of a deal with Iran before his re-election campaign. It seemed it was not the American team that was leading the goals of the negotiations but the Europeans. Things are changing but what is in the open shows that Obama might have removed the military option from the table. That is my guess. He seems to be now genuinely after a deal with Iran. France too has had a change in leadership and this plus the poor prospect of Merkel re-election in Germany coupled with European economic crisis, means that Obama has to make new alliances for his Iran policy as time passes.

China and Russia are not much enthusiastic over the issue specially with Putin in office now and China more worried about economic impact of the whole issue than its political fall out. So Obama is basically after wrapping this affair for his election.

Any Iran deal would be a ticket for Obama's re-election. The whole of Republican party drives on two things, gas prices at the pump and the Iran issue. If he can show that he has solved the Iran issue to some degree and the oil prices fall resultant of that deal, means he will be re-elected with much more ease.

What is more difficult to say, is whether Obama wants a tactical deal or a strategic one. In tactical deal, he might offer Iran some "relief" eg. suspension of some sanctions in return for Iranian giving up part of their nuclear program. In strategic deal, he would break a "grand deal" with Iran and resolve all issues between two countries and even opening the embassies. My take is that he is after a tactical deal only for his election day. And that also he wants to get with giving Iran minimum possible.

I guess in Moscow Putin might try to pressure both Iran and west for some compromise in order to boast that it was done in Russia. But most probably the talks will again get extended to somewhere else specially if parties do not go there prepared for some serious compromise plans eg. Iran giving up 20% enrichment in industrial scale but keeping lab level 20% and industrial level 5% and west easing up sanctions on Iran by removing oil sanctions, central bank sanctions and sanctions on all civilian items including that of jetliners. Without this I do not think it is going to happen in Moscow though. Maybe in Beijing.

 

[bozorgmehr]

Dont worry, i am sure there are Esfehooni officials in the Iranian delegation



If it was meant to be agressive i would have written in Caps lock
This guy is just a troll and he is no friend of Iran and its people. He would like to see suffering of the country and downfall of the Iranian government.

CAPS mean shouting, not necessarily aggressive.

And it doesn't matter if he is the devil himself. We have to exercise freedom of expression. That means he should be allowed to freely put forward his point of view, even if it goes against your thoughts, interests and everything you believe in. And in turn, you should be equally free to rebut his points in a civilized manner and express the reasons why you think he is wrong. The right is there for him as much for you. And you and I are not god to sit in judgement of people to decide if they're good or evil.

 

[bozorgmehr]

First, I must say that I consider this talk to be a tactical win for Iran, since they have basically imposed themselves on west. But there is more in play. From the language of talks it seems west is more desperate than Iran to have a successful deal. Iranian negotiators knew this weakness and capitalized on it by trying to extract more concessions from west.

In the past months some stuff have come out in open. The western economic instability, Israeli military and bureaucratic opposition to war with Iran, US inability to fight any more wars etc have become more apparent than few years ago. It is now more probable that the talk of war is just a propaganda to coerce Iran into a agreement favorable to western long term interests and Iranians know about this as evident from their conduct of talks in Baghdad.

I have also a "feel" that Obama is really desperate to have a kind of a deal with Iran before his re-election campaign. It seemed it was not the American team that was leading the goals of the negotiations but the Europeans. Things are changing but what is in the open shows that Obama might have removed the military option from the table. That is my guess. He seems to be now genuinely after a deal with Iran. France too has had a change in leadership and this plus the poor prospect of Merkel re-election in Germany coupled with European economic crisis, means that Obama has to make new alliances for his Iran policy as time passes.

China and Russia are not much enthusiastic over the issue specially with Putin in office now and China more worried about economic impact of the whole issue than its political fall out. So Obama is basically after wrapping this affair for his election.

Any Iran deal would be a ticket for Obama's re-election. The whole of Republican party drives on two things, gas prices at the pump and the Iran issue. If he can show that he has solved the Iran issue to some degree and the oil prices fall resultant of that deal, means he will be re-elected with much more ease.

What is more difficult to say, is whether Obama wants a tactical deal or a strategic one. In tactical deal, he might offer Iran some "relief" eg. suspension of some sanctions in return for Iranian giving up part of their nuclear program. In strategic deal, he would break a "grand deal" with Iran and resolve all issues between two countries and even opening the embassies. My take is that he is after a tactical deal only for his election day. And that also he wants to get with giving Iran minimum possible.

I guess in Moscow Putin might try to pressure both Iran and west for some compromise in order to boast that it was done in Russia. But most probably the talks will again get extended to somewhere else specially if parties do not go there prepared for some serious compromise plans eg. Iran giving up 20% enrichment in industrial scale but keeping lab level 20% and industrial level 5% and west easing up sanctions on Iran by removing oil sanctions, central bank sanctions and sanctions on all civilian items including that of jetliners. Without this I do not think it is going to happen in Moscow though. Maybe in Beijing.

Very well said. I will just add that as long as Iran gets to keep the 5% enrichment, the negotiations would have been a complete success from Iran's point of view. Remember, this is all Iran was asking for before the UNSC resolutions and sanctions started piling up. The Western demand at the outset was the utter and complete dismantlement of all enrichment activities. Iran never planned on outright nuclear weapon development. Nuclear weapons don't bring much benefit in Iran's national security calculus, and it will be very costly. However, the capability to make them if the need arises, and having everybody know that, is invaluable. It's like having your cake and eating it too.

 

[Abii]

haha enrichment for spare parts!!!
I just wish I was there to see the face of the Iranians. I'm surprised one of them didn't get up and bitchh slap the closest American lmao

Spare parts hahahaha I just can't stop laughing.

Reminds me of this:


American government: 'IRAN should give up their nuclear weapons' program. You do that and the USA will do trade with Iran again,' the Iranians say:

'That is very nice, America. Why don't you do this? Why don't YOU give up YOUR nuclear weapons' program and we will send you twenty trucks of pistachio nuts. How about that?

Omid Jalili

lmao

 

[Abii]

+1 on the comment about esfohoonis

Isfahan was our second home after Shiraz and I ******* love the place but damn can they haggle. There should be an annual haggling competition in the Middle East. I'm sure Isfahan will keep the crown for decades lmao.

yawn
This is becoming boring.
When will gulf war 4 begin?

An Indian with the flag of syrian rebels in his avatar, saudi as his birthplace and Canada as his current location and Ahvaz as his other current location.

You're suffering from a classic case of "you need to get laid and stop trolling" syndrome.

P.S. It's far more likely that the US is going to attack yet another arab nation than Iran in the next century. The Americans are either attacking you arabs or putting dictators in power in your countries and making protectorates out of them. Pathetic and sad, but satisfying at the same time.
food for thought

 

[ihealugo]

Banu Umayyah
SA and CA flag plus ur avatar and you live in ahwaz! lol!!!

in next 20 days we will send fajr . good

We need Qazvini and Rashti ones too!!!

 

[Hello_10]

haha enrichment for spare parts!!!
I just wish I was there to see the face of the Iranians. I'm surprised one of them didn't get up and bitchh slap the closest American lmao

Spare parts hahahaha I just can't stop laughing.

Reminds me of this:


American government: 'IRAN should give up their nuclear weapons' program. You do that and the USA will do trade with Iran again,' the Iranians say:

'That is very nice, America. Why don't you do this? Why don't YOU give up YOUR nuclear weapons' program and we will send you twenty trucks of pistachio nuts. How about that?

Omid Jalili

lmao

its not related to me in anyway but one thing i may say, whether its Iran or someone else, "If Iran's enemies have nuclear weapons and Iran has threats from them, then Iran must also have all those weapons which may counter its enemies."

i mean, "if, even one enemy of Iran including US has nuclear weapons and Iran has threat from them then Iran would also have the same weapons to defend itself." there is no other criterion of justice on this issue

 

[Malik Alashter]

I wish all that end in Moscow, but still wish.

 

[Hello_10]

If I am an Indian, why do you say "attacking you arabs" or am I some kind of hybrid? why would I care If america attacks arabs or not?
America would never attack us because it owes us hundreds of billion$, Iran on the other hand, I would be very surprised if it sees 2013 as one country.
The sad thing, is in reality Iran is not building a weapon and never will. It will get obliterated just for refusing to stop its nuclear program(that is and will always be nothing more than a program). Iran is trying to follow NK, but what it doesn't understand is that ME is not EA. A strategic miscalculation will set your country back 453 years. Very unfortunate indeed.
Anyway, good luck

have you seen a big and fat but hungry man willing to fight with even a weak man? US/EU gotto first worry for continuos food supply for their civilians. they just can't fund any war, except borrowing more to feed its people. they just can't stand in any battelfield, Afghan is its recent example. they can't manage to fund luxury of any new war, specially with Iran, which will lead their economy a free fall. they can't even afford to pay high price for oil during any new war, how will they fight? they just can't, , neither money they have nor even their military personnel have that high morale after losing in Afghan also