It says something — I’m not sure what — that people seem much more interested in Trump’s name coming off a building than in the possible end of a war. I understand Trump’s name is completely removed from the Kennedy Center, btw, but I haven’t seen an “after” photo yet.
Iran has been saying they’re ready to sign an agreement. Now Trump is saying he’s ready to sign the deal tomorrow, June 14. But Iran is saying it needs a few more days.
The details are awfully fuzzy. For example, at the signing of the agreement a 60-day period will begin during which the enriched uranium issue is to be addressed. But Washington seems to think this will be Iran’s getting rid of or de-radiating its nuclear fuel, while Iran seems to think the 60 days are for continued negotiations about what will be done with the nuclear fuel.
Israel isn’t party to the agreement, but Iran says that expects Israel to stop attacking Lebanon. Iran wants all sanctions lifted and all assets unfrozen, and it’s not clear to me if that has to be done or at least partly done before the Strait is opened. Iran also expects to continue to control the Strait and potentially charge fees for passing through it.
If anything significant happens I will update this post.
Israel isn’t party to the agreement, but Iran says that expects Israel to stop attacking Lebanon.
Hoo boy. Somehow I doubt that will happen. The Great Israel Project and all that.
I cannot say that I think Iran is all that confident about signing an MOU. For some unknown reasons they seem a bit dubious about the USA's willingness to adhere to an agreement and possible Trump's ability to stick to a decision for more than 15 minutes.
Iran's PressTV is reporting as of today:
Iran’s Foreign Ministry spokesman Esmaeil Baghaei said Tehran remains pessimistic about diplomacy with the United States due to Washington’s record of reneging on commitments, adding that no trip to Geneva has been planned over the next two days amid reports of a possible agreement with the US.
Baqaei said on Saturday that the US has a history of breaking promises with regard to talks with Iran, making Tehran ever more skeptical about the outcome of the negotiations.
On the other hand Professor Seyed Mohammad Marandi is reported on RT as saying that an agreement “has never been closer”. Marandi said the prospects for an agreement are now better than ever, but added that he “wouldn’t bet on it” because the US has repeatedly proven itself untrustworthy.
At the moment it look like things depend on a fickle US president and how he can convince the Iranians they will not be doublecrossed once again.
One worrying thing is a report I saw somewhere today that Israel and Lebanon are planning with US assistance to strengthen the Lebanese Army which is to have security responsibility over areas in Southern Lebanon once Hezbollah and the Israelis have withdrawn. I did not see any suggestion that Hezbollah was consulted on this brilliant idea.
What's interesting to me is that several hours ago Iran was saying it was ready or close to ready to sign an agreement, and Trump wasn't so sure. Now Trump is ready and Iran says it needs more time. Of course nobody should trust Trump. Before he was in politics Trump had a well-established practice of treating contracts as mere suggestions. He drove a lot of vendors out of business because he never paid them.
Deradiating is not a word. Reducing the level of enrichment from 60% by dilution with unenriched Uranium down to fuel level enrichment. I believe the old agreement allowed some 20% enriched to be kept, if they get it diluted to fuel grade they could claim it's a better deal than the one thrown out during the previous term.
Of course. But that sounds like de-radiating to me.
I think deradiating means pulling the old radiator out of the car and tossing it in the scrape bin. A bit like defenestrating a politician. 🙂
Any uranium or such should be used in Iran to desalinate sea water to counter the drought.
I really hope Trump & Iran find a way to end this damn war, ASAP, and I barely care about what it includes, as long as they open the Strait of Hormuz.
IMO, a 60-day negotiating period on Iran's enriched uranium makes sense; it will take at least that long to work out the details. I believe that Iran would accept any limits on its nuclear program that match the NPT norms (low-level enrichment for medical and research use would be allowed). Inspections will be hard to work out, as Iran had reason to believe that prior inspections were not entirely neutral.
But once again, the big problem will be Israel. Will Trump be able to talk Bibi out of occupying a big chunk of southern Lebanon? I guess I'm left hoping that Bibi gives Trump some kind of "promise", then at least appears to abide by it long enough for traffic through the Strait to get back [close] to normal. Then when – not "if" – Israel attacks Lebanon again, it will be a new war, a new problem. As long as the GCC countries have the sense to shun the "Abraham Accords", Iran wouldn't close the Strait again…
@elkhern wrote I really hope Trump & Iran find a way to end this damn war, ASAP, and I barely care about what it includes, as long as they open the Strait of Hormuz.
I'm actually torn about it. I know that Trump needs to have it open, to mitigate a wipe out come November, his principle reason. I want this wipe-out, and I especially want the nit-wits who supported this clown to feel the pain (it seems the only way they will learn), to help maximize the wipe-out.
And I know there's a remarkable amount of suffering around the world because of the Orange Megalomaniac. It's truly amazing how much destruction a single human being can cause. The most powerful man on earth.
Conversely, when he is removed from power, there will be euphoria coming from every corner of the globe. That day is coming.
Moonbat, I share your concerns about the mid-terms. Our success is absolutely critical. And it seems scary that the admin might find a way to get the straight open before November. However, based on numerous statements from recognized experts, the impact of what has already occurred will last a long time.
"According to the International Energy Agency, the conflict has resulted in severe or very severe damage to over 40 key energy assets (including refineries, gas processing plants, and major storage hubs) across nine Middle Eastern countries."
Petroleum is a global market, so ongoing scarcity will likely cause US oil companies to sell US oil to other countries while the prices are high, because US companies don't care about nations and their people, they only care about profits.
And the global economy depends on international trade… those enormous ship burn a lot of fuel.
Either way, even if the idiots find a way to get the strait open, I don't think things will go back to normal for a long long time. And the damage to agriculture in the US and the world due to unaffordable fertilizer cannot be undone quickly, as the time window for planting for many foodstuffs has passed, so farms have cut back. Food prices are going to remain high no matter what happens vis a vis Iran. Starvation is going to happen.
For me, the trade-off between making the blue wave bigger vs causing a global depression that affects everyone, including the US, is just too much of a situation where we're screwed either way. Without suggesting that anyone here favor one side or the other (get out sooner or let them F up longer), I've reached the point where getting the three assholes who are threatening to inadvertently destroy global civilization to stop with there stupid never ending revenge actions outweighs the political gain we could gain for the midterms. (The three are B.B., Agent Orange, and the Repub Guard)
Bibi does not want a peace deal, especially one that frees up 20B that Iran can spend to create armed opposition to the IDF. If Trump doesn't muck up a deal, expect Bibi to launch a strike that derails a deal.
Trump claimed that the Uranium in question was 'obliterated' in a strike on the underground facility with the centrifuges. Does anyone know if it was exhumed? Does anyone know how much there is, in what condition, and to what level of enrichment? I suspect we don't know and Iran isn't going to let US inspectors have unlimited access to facilities and documents. So we'll never know until we see a mushroom cloud.
Does anyone know how much there is, in what condition, and to what level of enrichment?
Well, the Iranians do. Otherwise, it looks like the best bet is a bit over 450kg of uranium enriched to 60%. Presumably in pristine condition. The US 'bombing' raids managed to block some access tunnels to various underground sites but likely did very little to no damage to the sites themselves. Some of those nuclear production sites and missile production sites are reported to be ~800 metres or more under hard rock.
It is unclear if the USA even knows where the material is stored. Traffic patterns before the bombing suggest that Iran was dispersing the material to various underground storage sites.
@doug – it's my belief that Iran's uranium is an utter red herring, the go to excuse for Operation Epstein Distraction. "The uranium!" Is 2026's "butter emails!". Trump said he obliterated Iran's nuclear program with bunker busting bombs, a year ago. The CIA says it's not a thing to worry about. I don't believe a word Trump says, especially "uranium".
Greta Thunberg offered a birthday greeting to the president:
My initial thought was to give you a one-way ticket to The Hague as a birthday gift, but that comment would probably go above your head. I will instead give you a can of alphabet soup; the sentences you poop out will be more coherent than anything you have ever said. Now you can finally take part in meaningful public discourse.
Neil Macquhar got front page billing with his news analysis piece in the NYT today. It begins with a lead that has few comparables:
I have nothing to write other than I have nothing worth reading to follow that lead. He does.
I read it. If anyone can donate a gift link I'd appreciate it, as I'm almost out already. I've been watching the new World War II documentary series narrated by Tom Hanks on the History Channel. It's pretty good. It reminded me that after France collapsed like a cheap card table Hitler began to make similar mistakes going forward.
Deadlocked Wars: How Major Powers Misread the Regions They Attacked – The New York Times
Thanks!