Slow and steady

There has been little movement in the past few weeks. Negotiations have been set between Iran and the P5+1 to begin on April 13th. The US has made it clear there is an opportunity for a peaceful resolution, but as Hilary Clinton has said, the "window of opportunity... will not remain open forever." The Iranian position is that talks with "mutual respect" will cover a range of topics. This obtuseness on the part of Iran and the converse acuteness of the topics open for discussion by the P5+1 may result in little progress. Without a well defined agenda of topics that are on the table to be discussed and agreed to by both sides, it may prove difficult to find common ground and resolution. I would not expect any developments of note from this negotiation, with the main focus being the setting of an agenda for future negotiations.

Missed Opportunities... and Second Chances?

Could a "Grand Bargain" such as what was put on the table in 2003 by the Iranian reformers and never responded to possibly come to fruition? Preserving the Islamic Republic seems paramount to forwarding the theocracies interests. My analysis is that the "right intention" of Obama sits well within the Iranian regime. Let's not forget that although the prolonged insurgency and reconstruction in Iraq was a difficult process, one which the Iranians know the Americans loathe to repeat, regime change was not. The knowledge of this fact is sure to be ever present in the power circles of Tehran. With Obama having recently sent a secret letter to Khamenei, I believe it is clear to Iranian leaders where Obama stands and at what point he will take military action. When negotiating with the Iranians, coming to the table as an equal with a mutual respect, such as what Obama seemingly portrays, may just be the intangible that changes the equation with all aforementioned factors at play. Only time will tell if this could be a second chance. Be assured that this week we have seen gestures from both Obama, and Khamenei. It could be nothing, or it could be the humble beginnings of something momentous. 

Signs of change?

There was an election in Iran last week whereby Grand Ayatollah Khamenei solidified his power base and tamped down any factionalization of the Iranian political system. The domination of the election by hardliners will actually unify the message of Iran to the US and make for a likely more stable process in negotiations between Iran and the west. The six major world powers have agreed to hold talks with Iran. This may signal a shift in the conflict, as Iran has also agreed to inspections of a suspected secret nuclear weapons site. A statement made by Supreme Leader Khamenei, when he said, "The purpose of the uproar they [the West] cause is to stop us. They know that we are not after nuclear weapons. They already know this. I do not have any doubts that in the countries that are opposed to us, the organizations in charge of decision-making are fully aware that we are not after nuclear weapons. Nuclear weapons are not at all beneficial to us. Moreover, from an ideological and [velayat-e] faqihperspective, we consider developing nuclear weapons as unlawful. We consider using such weapons as a big sin. We also believe that keeping such weapons is futile and dangerous, and we will never go after them. They know this, but they stress the issue in order to stop our movement.", lends credence that Iran is, and intends to be, a rational actor. Even with a virtual bomb the Iranians would most likely continue to act as a rational actor in their own self interest. It seems that these types of overtures have given the Obama administration a renewed strength to challenge Israel on a military option and to push for diplomacy that is may be now taking shape. Although Israel has not made a decision whether to attack or not, they have made it clear they will do what is in the perceived Israeli interest. I suggest the US learns this lesson and chooses to do the same, and does not blindly let Israel lead us down a path to war of aggression. If they feel that is what is necessary for their stability then so be it but let it be without US assistance if they don't want to follow our lead on the issue.

The drum beats on...

Iran refused access to requested nuclear sites by IAEA inspectors on their recent visit. After much talk about renewing negotiations while on site the inspectors were denied access to. Inspectors have once again come to Tehran and according to the Iranian govt they are cooperating fully, but the inspectors have again been denied access to any suspected nuclear sites. Access Denied

On another front, the spy wars between Iran and Israel have increased in lethality as of late as Iran has decided to engage in retaliation for the assassination of Iranian nuclear scientists. There has been an ongoing campaign of assassination of scientists involved in the Iranian nuclear program over the last few years with the most recent occurring a couple of weeks ago in Tehran. Subsequently, attacks on Israeli diplomats abroad were carried out in New Delhi, Tblisi, and Bangkok with varying degrees of success. This draws attention to the fact that it looks as if Iran has decided that they will no longer allow themselves to be the passive victim in this campaign but will look to a strategy of using proportional responses to aggression.

What is also of interest, is that the US and British are becoming increasingly vocal in opposition to a unilateral Israeli attack on Iran. Iran is now also taking a page out of the Bush Doctrine now claiming that they have a right of pre-emption. With so many divergent interests, and lack of dialogue between Iran and the west, the prospects of avoiding war seem very slim.