This afternoon WaPo posted a news story headlined U.S. and Iran close to signing peace deal, officials say, and the text made it sound as if, indeed, there were an actual deal and Iran was on board with it. Apparently there’s a memorandum with this deal spelled out, and several copies of it are floating around. What the bleep, I thought. Then I checked with the New York Times. Their headline said Conflicting Accounts Emerge of Possible Peace Deal. That sounds more like it. And then further down in the NY Times story we can read,
President Trump insisted on Friday that reports circulating about details of the proposed deal were incorrect. In a post on social media, he said the terms “Iran leaked” to the media “have NOTHING to do with the terms that were agreed to, in writing.”
That I can believe.
Reuters reported that Trump bristles over memorandum text that appears to favor Iran.
Versions and accounts of the memorandum were provided to Reuters by Western sources, sources from mediator Pakistan and senior Iranian sources. Similar drafts were also published in Iranian media.
The sources all stressed that the text was not yet final, with a Western source, an Iranian source and a Gulf source saying a key issue yet to be resolved was language on ceasing hostilities in Lebanon. Iran has demanded Israel end a campaign against Iran’s allies, the Hezbollah militia.
While there were minor differences in the accounts, all versions appeared to accept the principal terms proposed by Tehran over months of negotiations, while omitting key U.S. demands.
Reuters goes on to quote a U.S. official saying that a key term left out of Iran’s version of the memorandum is the destruction of Iran’s stockpile of highly enriched uranium. Another U.S. official said that release of the unfrozen assets would be contingent om the destruction of the uranium. The Iran version doesn’t mention that. (Note that, strictly speaking, the element uranium cannot be destroyed. However, there are ways to treat the uranium to reduce its isotopic enrichment level and make it less dangerous.)
So that’s what U.S. officials are expecting. However,
Under the terms of the text described by sources to Reuters, the United States would immediately begin providing Iran with billions of dollars in unfrozen assets, and waive sanctions on its oil exports, in return for Iran lifting its blockade of the Strait of Hormuz, largely closed since the war began.
Discussion of Iran’s nuclear programme would be set aside for a 60-day period of talks on a final settlement. The only explicit reference to nuclear policy for now would be a restatement of Iran’s commitment not to seek nuclear weapons, already Tehran’s official position dating to its ratification of the U.N. Non-Proliferation Treaty in 1970.
Yesterday Trump announced to the press that Tehran had agreed to not seek nuclear weapons as if this were a huge breakthrough and not Iran’s stated policy going back decades.
Another issue Iran wants dealt with is an agreement for Israel to stop attacking Lebanon, but as much as Trump believes he “calls all the shots,” Netanyahu isn’t about to agree to anything just because Trump tells him to.
Right now there are a ton of headlines about everybody being optimistic that a deal is within reach, But it seems to me there’s a big gap between what Iran expects and what Trump expects. My sense of things is that it’s all up to Trump. He will either scuttle the thing or will cave and sign it. The latter would be best for everybody but Trump, which is why I don’t think he’ll do it. We’ll see.
In other news: A judge denied a last-minute attempt to keep Trump’s name on the Kennedy Center building, and I understand a crowd has gathered to watch the name come off. Plus there are live cams. There is scaffolding up, but so far I can’t see anybody doing anything.
Over the past several hours there have been several alarming stories about Trump’s DoJ and FBI taking steps to investigate and bring charges of election fraud. This needs a post of its own, but here are a couple of links.
FBI raids Ohio voting rights organization
What the DOJ’s investigation into Los Angeles elections is really about
My guess is that the 'deal' says Iran can have everything they want if they don't tell anyone they are getting everything they want.
Iran is putting out conflicting accounts, what IRGC says is maximalist, Iran government less so. Just Iran style negotiating plus playing internal Iranian politics.
Of course, but any way you slice it it appears Iran expects Trump to release their assets before opening the Strait, and then any consideration of their enriched uranium would be negotiated later. That would amount to a total cave on Trump's part. Will Trump agree to that? It depends on how desperate h e is to avoid $7 a gallon gasoline before the midterms.
What really chaps my hide about this is, Trump had a better deal before he and Netanyahu started the war. The strait was open, Iran had committed to not building a nuclear weapon, we had inspectors in verifying. Now Trump's having to give up more just to get back to even some of that, at a cost starting with the release of billions of dollars more in frozen Iranian assets to get the strait open. Not to mention 13 US lives lost, extensive damage to US and allied bases in the region, the now $60 billion the war has cost US taxpayers, and damage to US and world economies. Meanwhile, if agreed to, Iran will now keep some of its uranium (and after this, can anyone blame them?). In sum, "art of the deal" Trump took us backwards at a tremendous cost. At least he's consistent.
There is always a catch. Bibi and Trump had it all figured out they thought. It would be quick and easy. Probably come with a get out of jail free card for both of them. But they forgot about the catch. Iran gets to do anything they can't stop them from doing. Number? What catch number is that one? It is the number Iran has on Bibi and Donie. And boy do they seem to have the number on both of them.
Regime Change is an upcoming book about a different plan, with a different catch. Authored by Maggie Haberman and Johnathan Swan, it gets mentioned brilliantly by Maureen Dowd in her recent column.
Remember Pizza Gate? Need to look up limns?
Alway beware of the catch. More and more people are getting the number on this group of stupid, craven, power-hungry people. Internationally.
Confession: I had to look up "limn".
A rare occurrence for me. Even for those two authors, obviously highly educated, it is a bit of a surprise.